2016
The Role of Design Patents in Patent Troll’s Litigation Designs
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsThe business world snapped to attention when Apple obtained a $400 million verdict from Samsung in a dispute largely focused on design patents covering how smart–phones look. The Supreme Court has agreed to take up the question of how to assign damages for design patent infringement—that is, how to distinguish between the value of the...
Read More2016
East Texas Court Orders Stay Pending Inter Partes Review
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsSometimes, the straightforward application of the law has the power to surprise. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has a process in place, called inter partes review, through which accused infringers can challenge the validity of patents asserted against them in litigation. Inter partes review is an adversary proceeding with a binding effect on...
Read More2016
A Rare Sight: East Texas Judge Grants Motion to Dismiss Patent Infringement Suit
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsThe 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 More2016
When You *Can* Say It Any Plainer Than That
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsOne of the peculiar features of most patent litigation—and one reason it is so expensive—is the process of claim construction. The courts have decided that disputes over the language of patent claims must be decided by the trial judge because they are “questions of law” not “questions of fact.” And that has come to mean...
Read More2016
New Year’s Grab Bag: Old Topics and Young Lawyers
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsWelcome 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 More2015
East Texas Judge Orders eDekka To Pay Accused Infringers’ Fees
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsIn a closely watched case from east Texas, Judge Gilstrap has awarded attorneys’ fees to defendants who successfully moved to dismiss the claims against them because the asserted patent was drawn to patent–ineligible subject matter. As we reported in September, Judge Gilstrap granted a set of motions to dismiss under Alice v. CLS Bank, then...
Read More2015
Google Adds Prior Art To Patent Page
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsThe Google Patents page has been for some time now a one–stop shop for copies of published U.S. patents and patent applications. This week, the search engine giant added a new wrinkle—prior art. In an announcement published on July 16, 2015, Google Deputy General Counsel for Patents, Allen Lo, and Software Engineer for Google Patents,...
Read More2015
John Oliver Explains Patent Trolls As Only He Can
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsIn eleven hilarious, yet informative, minutes, John Oliver gives patent trolls the Last Week Tonight satirical treatment: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bxcc3SM_KA Nuff said.
Read More2015
No Welcome Mat for Alice in East Texas After All?
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsA month ago, we highlighted the case of Clear With Computers v. Volvo Construction Equipment, in which Judge Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas granted a defense motion to dismiss for lack of patentable subject matter. We saw the application of Alice v. CLS Bank in a ruling on an early dispositive motion in...
Read More2014
Nebraska AG Hit With $725K Attorneys’ Fees Award In MPHJ Litigation
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsThe final shoe has dropped in the Nebraska lawsuit that pitted MPHJ Technology Investments and Activision TV (n/k/a ActiveLight) against outgoing Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning; and it has fallen on the AG. Recall that in 2013 Bruning sent a cease–and–desist letter to Activision TV’s counsel, Farney Daniels, demanding that the firm stop its patent...
Read More