Peter Brann Quoted in Leading Patent Blog

/ 0 Comments

IPWatchdog, which bills itself as one of the most-read patent blogs, reached out to counsel who submitted friend-of-the-court briefs and other leading practitioners to comment on the oral argument in the closely-watched U.S. Supreme Court case, United States v. Arthrex, concerning the constitutionality of the Patent and Trademark Appeal Board. Partner Peter Brann’s statement—”Based on...

Read More
separator

Peter Brann Speaks to New York IP Association about Supreme Court Case

/ 0 Comments

Partner Peter Brann was one of the featured speakers at a conference held on February 25, 2021, by the New York Intellectual Property Association on the U.S. Supreme Court case of United States v. Arthrex concerning the constitutionality of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Brann, along with B&I partners, David Swetnam-Burland and Stacy...

Read More
separator

Brann & Isaacson Secures Dismissal of Patent Case Against PetSmart

/ 0 Comments

On January 4, 2021, Senior District Judge Bruce S. Jenkins of the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah ordered the dismissal with prejudice of a patent infringement action filed by Modern Font Innovations against Brann & Isaacson client PetSmart. After hearing oral argument from partner David Swetnam-Burland, the judge ruled that Modern Font...

Read More
separator

Brann & Isaacson Files Supreme Court Amicus Brief in Patent Case

/ 0 Comments

On December 1, 2020, B&I partners, Peter J. Brann, David Swetnam-Burland, and Stacy O. Stitham, filed an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of two leading golf equipment manufacturers, Acushnet and Roger Cleveland Golf Company, in United States v. Arthrex. The case presents the question whether administrative law judges of the...

Read More
separator

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

Federal Circuit Directs ITC To Consider Revoking Or Modifying Civil Penalty For Infringement of Invalid Patent

/ 0 Comments

In a victory for Brann & Isaacson clients, DBN Holding, Inc. (formerly DeLorme Publishing Co.) and BDN LLC, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has issued an opinion reversing and remanding the International Trade Commission’s decision not to rule on the merits of a petition asking the ITC to set aside a civil penalty order....

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

TC Heartland Venue Argument Was Not “Available” Before TC Heartland Opinion Issued

/ 0 Comments

In this week’s episode of Patent Venue, when is a change in the law a change in the law? On May 22, 2017, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in TC Heartland, reversing the Federal Circuit and reaffirming that a corporate defendant can only be sued for patent infringement either in its state of residence...

Read More
separator

“Place of Business” Means Place of Business, Says Federal Circuit

/ 0 Comments

Previously, on Patent Venue: May 22, 2017: The Supreme Court issues its opinion in TC Heartland, returning to the rule of law that a corporate defendant can only be sued for patent infringement either in its state of residence or a judicial district in which alleged acts of infringement have occurred and the business has...

Read More
separator

Oil States Versus The Administrative State

/ 0 Comments

The Supreme Court has now heard from the petitioner in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC. At issue is not only the fate of inter partes review of patents by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, but possibly the ability of administrative agencies to review and retract their own erroneous decisions....

Read More
separator