On April 29, 2014, the Supreme Court ruled on two cases related to the Patent Act’s fee shifting provision under 35 U.S.C. §285. In Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., the Court defined an “exceptional” case entitled to fee-shifting to be “simply one that stands out from others with respect to the substantive strength of a party’s litigating position (considering both the governing law and the facts of the case) or the unreasonable manner in which the case was litigated.” In Highmark Inc. v. Allcare Health Mgmt. Sys., Inc., the Court held that because such a determination is at the discretion of the trial court judge, it should be reviewed with an abuse-of-discretion standard. These cases have been watched closely because of their potential impact on so-called “patent trolls.”
This webinar will cover the potential implications of the Octane and Highmark decisions on fee-shifting in patent litigation, especially in cases involving these “patent trolls.”
There is no fee but you must pre-register here: http://tinyurl.com/ljw5odg. [Tuesday, June 10, 2014 10:00 am (Chicago Time)].
More dramatic Fee-Shifting legislation is still pending in the Senate. However, each day’s delay makes its passage less likely as we move into election season.
= = = = =
I also wanted to highlight the fact that my co-author David Hricik has joined the Atlanta-based law firm of Taylor English Duma LLP in an of counsel position. Hricik will continue on as a Mercer law professor and also as the Patently-O legal ethics expert. - DC
- Read Hricik on Ethics at Patently-O: http://patentlyo.com/hricik
- See Hricik’s new Bio: http://www.taylorenglish.com/attorneys/david-charles-hricik/
= = = = =