Resources

§ 101 Update

Remarks by Director Iancu at the 10th Annual Patent Law & Policy Conference (Nov. 26, 2018)

Kevin A. Rieffel, What is Director Iancu Proposing the USPTO do for §101 Analysis?, IPWatchDog (Sept. 25, 2018)

Jeffrey A. Lefstin, Peter S. Menell, and David O. Taylor, Final Report of the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology Section 101 Workshop: Addressing Patent Eligibility Challenges, Berkeley Technology Law Journal (2018)

Steve Brachmann, Supreme Court Refuses Another 101 Patent Eligibility Appeal, IPWatchDog (Nov. 11, 2018)

Neil Ferrari & Daniel Venglarik, Federal Circuit Decisions Breathe New Life Into Alice Responses by Patent Prosecutors, IPWatchDog (March 15, 2018)
Ex Parte Barous

Berkheimer v. HP Inc., 881 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2018)

Aatrix Software Inc v. Green Shades Software Inc., 882 F.3d 1121 (Fed. Cir. 2018)

Exergen Corp. v. KAZ USA Inc., 2018 WL 1193529 (Fed. Cir. 2018)


Damages

WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., 138 S. Ct. 2129 (2018)

Holbrook, Timothy Richard, Extraterritoriality and Proximate Cause after WesternGeco, Yale Journal of Law & Technology (2018, forthcoming)

Jeffrey A. Lefstin, Peter S. Menell, and David O. Taylor, Final Report of the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology Section 101 Workshop: Addressing Patent Eligibility Challenges, Berkeley Technology Law Journal (2018)


Venue Developments

Ofer Eldar and Neel Sukhatme, Will Delaware Be Different? An Empirical Study of TC Heartland and the Shift to Defendant Choice of Venue, Cornell Law Review (2018, forthcoming)

Christopher A. Cotropia, Jay P. Kesan, David L. Schwartz, Heterogeneity Among Patent Plaintiffs: An Empirical Analysis of Patent Case Progression, Settlement, and Adjudication, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies (2018)

Fiona Bell and Robert Reckers, Patent Venue: The State Of The Law A Year After The Dramatic Changes Introduced By TC Heartland (April 3, 2018)


Design Patents

Sarah Burstein, The Article of Manufacture Today, 31:2 Harvard J. L. & Tech. 718 (2018)


Multinational Litigation Strategy and Coordination

Jabeen Bhatti, German Patent Ruling Could Impact European Auto Industry, BloombergLaw (July 12, 2017)

Noah A. Brumfield et al., Strategies for protecting Taiwanese businesses from cross-border risks, White & Case

Conversant Wireless Licensing v. Huawei, UK High Court of Justice (Apr. 16, 2018)

Pat Treacy and Matthew Hunt, Litigating a ‘FRAND’ patent license: the Unwired Planet v. Huawei judgment, 13 Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 124 (February 1, 2018)

Peter Leung and John Butcher, China to Open National IP Appeals Court Amid U.S. Trade Spat, BloombergLaw News (Nov 6, 2018)


Obviousness

Gene Quinn and Steve Brachman, CAFC Vacates PTAB Obviousness Decision, Nonobviousness Nexus Established by Patent Owner, IPWatchDog (October 24, 2018)
(discussion of LiquidPower Specialty Products)

Courtenay Brinckerhoff, Not-Quite Prior Art Supports Obviousness Of Copaxone Patents In IPR Proceedings, Foley & Lardner LLP – The National Law Review (November 13, 2018)
(discussion of Yeda Research & Development Co.)

Robert Schaffer, Joseph Robinson, Gene Quinn, Conclusory approach to obviousness by PTAB in IPR insufficient to render claims invalid, IPWatchDog (April 1, 2018)
(discussion of DDS Tech)

LiquidPower Specialty Products v. Baker Hughes, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 29240 (Fed. Cir. 2018).

Yeda Research & Development Co., v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc (Fed. Cir. 2018)

DSS Tech. Mgmt. v. Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2018)


Litigation Financing

Brian J. Love & James Yoon, Predictably Expensive: A Critical Look at Patent Litigation in the Eastern District of Texas, 20 Stanford Technology Law Review (STLR) 1 (2017).

Kevin LaCroix, The Latest on Third-Party Litigation Financing, D&O Diary (January 15, 2018)

ABA Guide to Litigation Financing

Orrick, Third-Party Litigation Financing: When Can a Defendant Follow the Dollar Signs?
(discussion of recent NDCA order regarding discovery over litigation funding)

Space Data Corp. v. Google LLC (order by Judge Freeman regarding discovery of litigation funding)


New Discovery Rules—Same Old Tactics

Charles Fax, Cost-Shifting in Discovery after the 2015 Amendments to Rule 26 (October 12, 2018)

Paul W. Grimm, Are We Insane: The Quest for Proportionality in the Discovery Rules of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 36 Rev. Litig. 117 (2017)


Claim Construction

PTO, Changes to the Claim Construction Standard for Interpreting Claims in Trial Proceedings Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (October 11, 2018)
(changing the BRI standard to the Phillips interpretation)

Chris Cotropia et al., Response to the Proposed Changes to the Claim Construction Standard for Interpreting Claims in Trial Proceedings Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (July 9, 2018)

David Cochran and David Anderson, Claim Constructions Under the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard Must be Reasonable, Jones Day (June 23, 2018)

Intellectual Property Owners Association, How Different Are the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation and Phillips Claim Construction Standards? (July 2018)

Paromita (Mita) Chatterjee, Phillip W. Citroen, Michael Stramiello, Joseph E. Palys & Naveen Modi, USPTO Proposes Changing Claim Construction Standard for IPRs, PGRs, and CBMs, PaulHastings (May 10, 2018)

Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC, Fed. Cir. (Aug. 27, 2018)


AIA Patents In Litigation

Justin Krieger and Christopher Thomas, Supreme Court to Review AIA On-Sale Bar (June 26, 2018)

Helsinn Healthercare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc (Fed. Cir. 2017)

PTO First Inventor to File Comprehensive Training Slides (2013)
 


Who Are You Calling a Pirate? Willful Infringement and Enhanced Damages

Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc.

Colleen Chien, et al., Enhanced Damages, Litigation Cost Recovery, and Interest, in Patent Remedies and Complex Products: Toward a Global Consensus, Ch. 3 (Brad Biddle, Jorge L. Contreras, Brian J. Love, and Norman V. Siebrasse, eds.) (forthcoming 2018, Cambridge University Press)

Michael J. Sacksteder and Scott Tolchinsky, Litigation Alert: Supreme Court Expands Discretion to Award Enhanced Damages for Patent Infringement and Eliminates the Federal Circuit’s “Seagate Test,” Fenwick & West (June 15, 2016)

Gavin W. Moler, Balancing Interests Post-Halo: A Proposal For Constitutionally Bounded Enhanced Damages in Patent Infringement, 32 Berkeley Tech L. J. 413 (2018)


Keynote: The Intersection Between Patent Law and Antitrust, Makan Delrahim, AAG, DOJ Antitrust Division

David J. Kappos, The Antitrust Assault on Intellectual Property, 31:2 Harvard J. L. & Tech. 665 (2018)

Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim, Remarks at IAM’s Patent Licensing Conference in San Francisco (Sept. 10, 2018)

Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim, Keynote Address at the LeadershIP Conference on IP, Antitrust, and Innovation Policy (April 10, 2018)

Lipsky, Tad and Wright, Joshua D. and Ginsburg, Douglas H. and Yun, John M., Federal Trade Commission’s Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century, Innovation and Intellectual Property Policy, Comment of the Global Antitrust Institute, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University (October 23, 2018)


Daubert

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (S. Ct. 1993)

Enplas Display Device Corp. v. Seoul Semiconductor Co., No. 2016-2599 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 19, 2018)

Exmark Mfg. Co. v. Briggs & Stratton Power Prods. Grp, LLC, 879 F.3d 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2018)

Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Sys., 879 F.3d 1299 (Fed. Cir. 2018)

PriceWaterhouseCoopers, “Daubert challenges to financial experts” (2017)


IPR Strategy

SAS Institute v. Iancu (S. Ct. 2018)

Michaels, Andrew C., SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu: The Statute is Hereby Clear (May 7, 2018). Geo. Wash. L. Rev. On the Docket (May 7, 2018)

Jones Day: SAS Institute win in Supreme Court is a game-changer for PTAB cases (April 2018)

Greg Castanias, SAS: A Patent Litigation Game-Changer and Check on Agency Overreach, Jones Day (June 29, 2018)


Patents, the PTAB, and Constitutional Law

Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group LLC, et al. (S. Ct. 2018)

St. Regis Mohawk Tribe, Allergan, Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. Akorn, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2018)

Supreme Court Decides Two Major Cases Affecting Administrative Adjudication of Patents , Winston Strawn (April 24, 2018)

Supreme Court Issues Two Decisions Impacting Practice Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, WSGR (April 24, 2018)


Lunch Keynote: The Future of the Patent System: Andrei Iancu, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO

Remarks by Director Iancu at 2018 National Lawyers Convention (Nov. 19, 2018)

Remarks by Director Iancu at the American Intellectual Property Law Association Annual Meeting (Oct. 25, 2018)

Remarks by Director Iancu at the Intellectual Property Owners Association 46th Annual Meeting (Sept. 24, 2018)


Year in Review

Lemley, Mark A. and Reinecke, Jason, Recent Developments in Patent Law 2018 (June 4, 2018)


Accelerating Diversity—What Works and Doesn’t Work?

DiversityLab, 41 Law Firms are Announced as Mansfield Certified for the Inaugural Pilot (August 20, 2018)

DiversityLab, Legal Department (aka Clients) Efforts Designed to Drive Outside Counsel Diversity


IPRs: Coordination & Estoppel

Niky R. Bagley, Treatment of PTAB Claim Construction Decisions: Aspiring to Consistency and Predictability, 32 Berkeley Tech L. J. 315 (2018)

Antony Pfeffer and Krystal Anderson, Potential Issues for “Not Yet Practicing” PTAB Petitioners: Constitutional Requirements for Appealing PTAB Decisions, Orrick (May 21, 2018)

Alex Chachkes and Briggs Wright, Out of Time? Federal Circuit Reverses Course on Review of PTAB Time-Bar Determinations, Orrick (January 22, 2018)

Antony Pfeffer and Alex Fields, Use It or Lose It: Assert All Prior Art References During IPR, Orrick (May 2, 2018)

 


Notice – Latest updates on COVID-19 policies and resources for the UC Berkeley campus community. — View Details