David Swetnam-Burland Speaks to William & Mary Law Students

/ 0 Comments

On February 14, 2019, partner David Swetnam-Burland gave a presentation to the Student Intellectual Property Society at the William & Mary Law School in Williamsburg, Virginia. Swetnam-Burland’s talk, “Bad Patents, Good Law?” addressed his experience defending Brann & Isaacson’s e–commerce clients in patent troll litigation, and discussed recent developments in patent law and litigation from...

Read More
separator

J. Crew Wins Summary Affirmance In Patent Dispute With Intellectual Ventures

/ 0 Comments

On November 20, 2017, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals summarily affirmed the invalidity of two patents asserted against J. Crew by Intellectual Ventures without opinion, just two weeks after hearing oral argument from Partner David Swetnam–Burland. In August 2016, Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas granted J. Crew’s motion to dismiss...

Read More
separator

Patent News Grab–Bag

/ 0 Comments

Some news of note for this Valentine’s Day week: N.D. Cal. Orders Early Damages Disclosures: The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has amended its local patent rules to require the parties to (1) provide the court with a good–faith (non–binding) estimate of the damages range expected for the case at the...

Read More
separator

Patent Trolls Still Can’t Find A Way Through Alice’s Looking Glass

/ 0 Comments

We (and others) have written frequently and at length about the impact of Alice v. CLS Bank on patent litigation—how the test set out in that case has enabled litigants and courts to obtain an early determination of whether a patent claims a viable invention or just an abstract idea. Parties who assert patents in...

Read More
separator

A Rare Sight: East Texas Judge Grants Motion to Dismiss Patent Infringement Suit

/ 0 Comments

The data are in. As we’ve previously discussed, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas outstrips all others for patent infringement litigation, with approximately 40% of all recent cases filed in that one court. The reasons plaintiffs—especially patent trolls—favor this district have been studied. Most recently, in an August 2015 article, “Forum...

Read More
separator

Timing Is Everything: Alice in East Texas (Again)

/ 0 Comments

Well, we warned you that Alice v. CLS Bank was going to remain a hot topic in 2016. Two more data points to support that theory have emerged, each of which, in a different way, relates to the proper timing of a judicial decision on the legal question of whether a patent’s claims are written...

Read More
separator

New Year’s Grab Bag: Old Topics and Young Lawyers

/ 0 Comments

Welcome to 2016! By all accounts, 2015 was a banner year: For patent litigation—the second–highest number of patent lawsuits ever were filed in 2015 (just behind 2013); For patent trolls, which accounted for two–thirds of those new lawsuits, up from 2014; And for the Eastern District of Texas, in which 44% of all new patent...

Read More
separator

Digital Downloads Aren’t “Articles”; New Rules For Alice In East Texas

/ 0 Comments

A couple more newsworthy items to report on this week: * In a closely watched case in the Federal Circuit, a split panel of that court has held that the International Trade Commission does not have jurisdiction to protect against alleged patent infringement based on “importation” by digital download. Over a vigorous dissent from Judge...

Read More
separator

Alice Strikes Twice In East Texas

/ 0 Comments

As a follow–up to yesterday’s post, we note that Judge Schroeder of the Eastern District of Texas also granted a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Alice v. CLS Bank on September 21. While two decisions do not a trend make, two decisions in one day send some kind of signal that Alice motions...

Read More
separator

Alice Bounces eDekka Patent In East Texas

/ 0 Comments

The judges of the Eastern District of Texas have not been the most welcoming in the country to the early application of Alice v. CLS Bank—the Supreme Court opinion that lays out the two–step test for determining whether a patent should be voided because it claims abstract ideas, not inventions—in patent litigation. But the winds...

Read More
separator