Now you have your shiny, new issued patent, and you want to go forth and profit from it. To do that, you need to let all of those “infringers” (okay, “potential licensees”) know that you have a patent and that they should
Read More
With the implementation of the America Invents Act (AIA), the United States went from a first to invent to a first inventor to file system of determining priority of patent rights. However, that was not all that changed with the implementation of
Read More
Employees Who Assign Patent Rights to Employers May Have Standing to Challenge Omission as Inventors
Employers do not automatically obtain legal ownership of the patent rights to their employees’ inventions simply because of the employer-employee relationship. Thus, it is a standard practice to require employees to assign their patent rights to their employers in an employment agreement.
Read More
Last week, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated the May 13, 2015 panel opinion in Akamai Technologies, Inc. et al. v. Limelight Networks, Inc. (Fed. Cir., Slip Opinion Case No. 2019-1372, -1380, -1416, -1417) and issued a new en
Read More
When drafting patent claims for a device, it is often desirable to describe the device based on how it works instead of how it is structured. Describing a device based on how it works is often referred to as “functional claiming.” Claims
Read More
On May 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., (Case No. 13-896, May 26, 2015). A copy of the slip opinion may be found here. Active Inducement of Infringement: A Good Faith
Read More
Following a remand from the U.S. Supreme Court last June, on May 13, 2015 the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued another opinion in Akamai Technologies, Inc. et al. v. Limelight Networks, Inc.(Fed. Cir., Slip Opinion Case No. 2009-1372, May 13,
Read More
Determining patent infringement damages is complicated and often borders on the metaphysical. Under U.S. law, a patent holder is entitled to damages adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a “reasonable royalty.” In some cases, patent holders
Read More
Sometimes the best defense is a good offense. Clients often assume that they are entitled to a patent because no single piece of prior art shows all of their invention. In that case the invention may be novel. However, it does not
Read More
The claims of a U.S. Patent define the scope of the patent holder’s right to exclude. In its 1996 Markman decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that disputes over the meaning of claim terms are an issue of law to be decided by a
Read More