Responding to a Patent Infringement Cease and Desist Letter Competing in today’s business climate is difficult enough without the addition of legal headaches. But legal conflicts are part of modern business and sometimes arise in the form of a cease and desist letter from a patent owner. These letters follow a familiar form where a patent owner identifies the patented invention, claims that your product uses it without permission, and demands that in the very near future you either pay up, stop the activity, or both.
Inequitable conduct results in outsized antitrust award Bringing a patent infringement lawsuit always comes with certain financial risks. For example, if you lose a case, you forfeit costs and fees. That isn’t the only potential risk, though. One patent infringement lawsuit, TransWeb, LLC v. 3M Innovative Properties Co., backfired in a much bigger way. The patentee was ordered to pay $26 million — in antitrust damages — based on its inequitable conduct.
On the tail of a number of important courtroom wins, intellectual property law firm Patterson Thuente IP welcomes attorney Adam Szymanski to help support its growing IP Litigation practice. Szymanski has experience with litigation surrounding patents, trademarks, and other IP-related disputes, as well as post issuance proceedings. He has worked on the transactional side of IP law as well and has a technical background in advanced materials, life science technologies, chemicals, and nanotechnology.
Patterson Thuente IP was named as counsel in one of the largest jury verdicts of 2015 in The National Law Journal’s (NLJ) annual “Top 100 Verdicts” list. The firm represented the plaintiffs in Cardiac Science Corp. v. LifeCor Inc, a breach of contract case that resulted in a $23 million verdict. Each year NLJ and its VerdictSearch affiliate compile the list by searching court records, consulting with practitioners and reviewing other published reports. The totals represent jury awards and do not account for judicial reductions, offsets or appeals. Read more about the case
Federal Circuit expands liability for patent infringement In some welcome news for patent owners, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has issued a unanimous decision that expands liability for direct infringement. The ruling should make it easier for patentees to establish liability for infringement of patented methods when multiple parties carry out a method’s steps.
Patterson Thuente IP and Puget Bioventures were successful at the Federal Circuit with a unique case involving a patent that expired during a PTAB appeal. On January 14, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated an inter partes re-examination decision, upholding some of the claims and affirming validity of other claims in Puget’s patent on knee replacement technology.
More options available for patent owners The marketplace for patent insurance has expanded over the past year from one insurer to four. This has created the opportunity for a broadening of favorable coverage terms for patent owners, and in many instances, a lower premium cost. Coverage continues to be defined under two broad categories; patent holder insurance and infringement defense insurance.