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 Litigation Reform Inches Forward (Yet Again)

/ 0 Comments

As reported in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal, the Senate has joined the House of Representatives in introducing legislation aimed at reforming patent litigation procedures to address the patent troll problem. The bill, introduced in a rare show of bi–partisanship by Senators Cornyn, (R., Tex.), Grassley (R., Iowa), Leahy (D., Vt.), and...

Read More
separator

PTO Endorses Patent Reform; Inspector General Questions Patent Quality Control

/ 0 Comments

News of note from both ends of the patent litigation spectrum: The Patent and Trademark Office voiced general support for Congressional efforts to reform abusive patent litigation practices, while the Office of the Inspector General found the PTO lacking in its quality control measures for ensuring the issuance of high–quality patents. The juxtaposition is striking...

Read More
separator

Patent Reform Rises Again, As Do Arguments About It

/ 0 Comments

On Monday, the CEOs of Cisco and J.C. Penney published an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal (subscription required) under the eye–grabbing title, “Stopping the Economy–Sapping Patent Trolls.” In it, John Chambers and Myron Ullman voiced their support for the reintroduction by Rep. Robert Goodlatte of Virginia of the Innovation Act. As we wrote...

Read More
separator

Patent Reform Is Back…Alice Is Big…The PTO Is Unmasked

/ 0 Comments

…and, we’re back, with a post–hibernation blitz of patent news… Patent reform, it’s back too. Virginia Congressman Bob Goodlatte has reintroduced the patent reform bill that died in the Senate last year. The bill’s provisions are designed to pare back patent troll litigation. It would (1) require the plaintiff to identify the patent–owner before filing...

Read More
separator