We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 99

Federal Circuit explores when litigation is “reasonably foreseeable” for spoliation purposes
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • May 19 2011

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has issued rulings in companion patent-infringement cases involving the alleged spoliation of documents; at issue was a determination as to when litigation is "reasonably foreseeable," thus triggering a document-preservation duty


Federal Circuit reminds litigants to cross-appeal patent invalidity claim
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • March 21 2013

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, in the context of patents on improvements to electronic animal collars, has in large part affirmed a lower


Validity of AIA’s retroactive elimination of qui tam provision upheld in false marking suit
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • January 10 2013

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that Congress's retroactive elimination of a provision allowing private parties to prosecute


Federal Circuit addresses personal jurisdiction in patent infringement litigation
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • August 30 2012

Finding that the U.S. Supreme Court “has yet to reach a consensus on the proper articulation of the stream-of-commerce theory” of personal jurisdiction to assess whether a court has jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant in a patent infringement suit, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has applied its own theory, which assesses the pleadings and evidence under “any articulation of the stream-of-commerce theory,” and has determined that a district court in Wyoming properly dismissed two patent infringement lawsuits for lack of jurisdiction


Malpractice claim based on patent application belongs in federal court
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • May 3 2012

A Federal Circuit Court of Appeals panel has determined that (i) it had jurisdiction over an appeal from a district court order dismissing claims of fraud filed against lawyers who allegedly mishandled the plaintiff’s patent application and (ii) because the statute of limitations was tolled while related malpractice litigation was pending before a California state court, the lawsuit was timely filed in federal court


SCOTUS sides with FTC in reverse payment deals
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 20 2013

A divided U.S. Supreme Court has determined that patent-infringement settlement agreements requiring the patentee to pay the claimed infringer


U.S. Supreme Court issues ruling on patentability of human genes
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 20 2013

The U.S. Supreme Court has determined that while human genes and the information they encode are not patent eligible, despite the effort required to


Researchers conclude costs of litigation growing in relation to benefits of patent protections
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 20 2013

Economics, law and technology scholars affiliated with U.S. and German institutions have issued a paper that examines data on the costs of patent


En banc Federal Circuit issues ruling on appellate jurisdiction over patent infringement issues
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 20 2013

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals en banc has determined that parties may appeal the liability issues in a patent infringement action even if the


Federal Circuit affirms dismissal of patent assignor estoppel claims
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • February 21 2013

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the district court's dismissal of claims filed by a patent owner against the co-inventor who