| 02/01/2010 |
| Client Alert: USPTO issues interim procedures for recalculating patent term under Wyeth v. Kappos |
| In view of the Federal Circuit’s recent ruling in Wyeth v. Kappos, No. 2009-1120 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 7, 2010), the USPTO has issued interim procedures giving patentees a new way to request recalculation of patent term adjustment (“PTA”) in accordance with Wyeth. See USPTO Docket No. PTO-P-2010-0006, available at ... |
| |
| 01/08/2010 |
|
Client Alert: Federal Circuit rules that USPTO has been providing too little patent term adjustment
|
| In Wyeth v. Kappos, No. 2009-1120 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 7, 2010), the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court ruling that overturned USPTO’s interpretation of 35 U.S.C. § 154(b) relating to patent term adjustment. The Federal Circuit’s ruling will allow some patent applicants to obtain more patent term adjustment pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 154(b) than under previously established USPTO procedure. Significantly, according to the Federal Circuit’s holding, the delays specified by § 154(b)(1)(A) within ... |
| |
| 12/28/2009 |
| Client Alert: Federal Circuit rules that each falsely marked article is separately fined under 35 U.S.C. § 292 |
| A decision issued by the Federal Circuit on December 28, 2009 increases the potential for liability for false marking pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 292. Section 292 provides that one who falsely marks an article with certain patent information “[s]hall be fined not more than $500 for every such offense.” In The Forest Group, Inc. v. Bon Tool Co., No. 2009-1044 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 28, 2009), the Federal Circuit answered a long-standing question and ruled that the “offense” corresponds to each falsely ... |
| |
| 12/04/2009 |
| Client Alert: New Federal Circuit decision “undoubtedly marks a shift
from past declaratory judgment cases” |
| A decision issued by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on December 4, 2009 may make it easier to obtain declaratory judgment ("DJ") jurisdiction against a non-competitor patent holding company or non-practicing entity. In Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Acceleron LLC, No. 2009-1283 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 4, 2009), the Federal Circuit developed the MedImmune/SanDisk line of DJ jurisdiction cases, reversing a district court (D. Del.) dismissal of a DJ action for lack of jurisdiction. Acceleron, ... |
| |
| 11/23/2009 |
| Woodcock Washburn Featured in Drexel University's Philanthropy Journal |
| Through their incomparable expertise and extraordinary generosity, Woodcock Washburn stepped forward to help Drexel leverage its traditional strengths in technology and business to develop a competitive Intellectual Property Law program. According to Dean Roger Dennis, “The Earle Mack School of Law could not have launched its Intellectual Property Law program and concentration without the springboard provided by Woodcock Washburn.” |
| |
| 06/11/2009 |
| Client Alert: Facebook Adding Personalized URLs to Its Services |
| Starting on June 13, 2009, at 12 a.m. (EDT), Facebook will allow its users to select personalized uniform resource locators ("URLs") for the Facebook service. For those Facebook users who select personalized URLs, their personal profile pages would be identified by URLs containing their selected name, for example http://www.facebook.com/selectedname. With a personalized URL, users can more easily market their Facebook presence by simply advertising the URL. Other social network sites currently ... |
| |
| 06/01/2009 |
| Got Patents? Great! But So Do Your Competitors... |
| Remember how it started? You had a great idea. You decided to turn your vision into a reality. You talked it up, secured investors, started your company, located the best talent you could find, and went to work. It was rough for a while, but eventually you did it. You proved your concept, got your marketing and distribution channels in order, set up for manufacturing, and took your show on the road. Along the way, you were prudent enough to apply for patent protection. Presumably, your patents will ... |
| |
| 05/15/2009 |
| Client Alert: Infringers Have A Duty to Disclose Post-Trial Sales |
| In an opinion rendered April 30, Judge Sue Robinson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware held that an adjudicated patent infringer has a duty to disclose post-trial sales of the accused product or face punitive damages. TruePosition v. Andrew Corp., 05-747-SLR (D. Del. 2009). After having been found by a jury to have willfully infringed a patent directed to finding cell phone users, the defendant continued to supply the accused product during the post-trial briefing period without ... |
| |
| 03/25/2009 |
| "Phasing-in IP for Startups and Maintaining its Value," The Atlanta Lawyer, March 2009 |
| Representing a startup poses significant challenges for an attorney. Startups are big consumers of legal services, but they are strapped for cash. Every dollar counts, and every dollar wasted increases the likelihood of failure. As counsel for a startup you are faced with issues relating to corporate formation, tax, governance, employment and intellectual property (IP) just to name a few. In this article, we focus on the IP challenges ... |
| |
| 03/16/2009 |
| "Business Models, Value Chains and Value Propositions," IAM Magazine, March/April 2009 |
| In the dotcom boom, too many start-up internet companies raised – and subsequently blew – billions of dollars of investment without a viable business model. Many had no clear way of making money. Since the dotcom bust, there has been a renewed awareness in the viability of
companies’ business models. That was never more evident than in the fourth quarter of 2008. When the US automobile industry begged Congress for a bailout, it encountered a near-universal question. If GM, Ford and Chrysler were ... |
| |
