Ostrolenk Faber is a premier intellectual property boutique law firm. Since 1929, we have specialized in domestic and international patent, trademark and copyright law matters. We handle all aspects of IP law from counseling clients to prosecuting their applications to litigating their disputes. Our client base spans from Fortune 500 companies to privately owned businesses to individual inventors. They operate in fields as diverse as consumer electronics, luxury goods, entertainment, pharmaceuticals, and industrial products. With over 75 years of history, we have participated in the development of intellectual property law and gained the experience necessary to best serve our clients now and in the future. Read More
Remote Control Patent Case Warrants Atty Fees: Judge
Law360, New York (March 12, 2015, 5:56 PM ET - By Vin Gurrieri) -- A California federal judge has ruled that Universal Electronics Inc. must pay some of the attorneys' fees that rival Universal Remote Control Inc. incurred defending itself in a failed suit over four remote control patents, after finding the case was filed in part as "payback" for URC's success in the market.
U.S. District Judge Andrew J. Guilford on Tuesday determined that under the standard set by the U.S. Supreme Court in last year's Octane Fitness ruling, Universal Electronics' conduct in litigating several of the asserted patents in the case was exceptional.
Read The Full Article @ Law360.com
U.S. Supreme Court Lowers the Bar to Recover Attorneys’ Fees
In two cases heard together, the United States Supreme Court lowered the bar for an award of attorneys’ fees in patent cases under 35 U.S.C. §285, holding that “an ‘exceptional’ case is simply one that stands out from others….” instead of where “both (1) the litigation is brought in subjective bad faith, and (2) the litigation is objectively baseless.” The Court also held that determining a case to be ‘exceptional’ is at the discretion of the district courts “considering the totality of the circumstances,” and that the Federal Circuit must review those determinations for an “abuse of discretion,” not “de novo” as done previously. Read More
Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs
The Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs (Hague Agreement) will go into effect for the United States on May 13, 2015. Accordingly, beginning May 13, 2015, it will be possible for U.S. applicants to file a single international design application either with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) or through the USPTO as an office of indirect filing to obtain protection in a number of countries that are party to the Hague Agreement. In addition, applicants filing international design applications on or after May 13, 2015 will be able to designate the United States for design protection. U.S. design patents resulting from applications filed on or after May 13, 2015 will have a 15 year term from issuance.
Learn more at: http://1.usa.gov/1zOwBxY
Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instr's, Inc., No. 13-369, June 2, 2014
The U.S. Supreme Court set aside the Federal Circuit's "insolubly ambiguous" standard for definiteness of a claim under 35 U.S.C. § 112, concluding that "the Federal Circuit's formulation, which tolerates some ambiguous clams but not others, does not satisfy the statute's definiteness requirement."
As Seen In… Forbes
Fluent in the Languages of Technology and Law
Follow us on Facebook