in
Advanced Search
TreatiseTreatise

Patent Litigation (2nd Edition)
 by Laurence H. Pretty
 
 Copyright: 2012-2013
 Last Updated: April 2013

 Product Details >> 

Product Details

x
  • ISBN Number: 9781402417696
  • Page Count: 482
  • Number of Volumes: 1
  •  
  • The purchase of PLI titles may include Basic Upkeep Service, whereby
    supplements, replacement pages and new editions may be shipped
    to you immediately upon publication for a 30-day examination. This
    service is cancelable at any time.

The new Second Edition of Patent Litigation enhances your ability to prevail at trial while helping you cut the costs and complexity of litigation.

Many of America’s leading patent litigators guide you through all the litigation stages, helping you to understand various infringement actions and their respective burdens of proof; conduct comprehensive pre-suit investigations that streamline your cases; develop potent case themes; assemble strong litigation teams; get an early edge over opponents during discovery; reduce expenses by developing smart litigation budgets; maximize the persuasive impact of documents, exhibits, and lay and expert witnesses; and fortify your case while controlling costs by making savvy use of computers, jury consultants, and litigation support vendors.

Extensively revised and updated to reflect the impact of the America Invents Act of 2011, the new edition highlights AIA provisions regarding the first inventor-to-file system, prior art, swearing back, the defense of prior commercial use by the accused infringer, the on-sale and public use bars, tax strategy patents, best mode, false marking, joinder of defendants, obtaining
opinions of counsel, and more.

In addition, a new chapter is devoted to challenges to patent validity in the Patent and Trademark Office under the AIA, including the new inter partes review, post-grant review, derivation proceedings (and the elimination of interferences), supplemental examinations, and more. Beyond its treatment of the AIA, the new edition adds new discussion of joint infringement, spoliation, waiver of the attorney-client privilege, the use of mock trials and focus groups, and the use of summaries of evidence, among  many other topics.

Updated at least once a year, Patent Litigation is an indispensable practical resource for every patent litigator.

  Patent Litigation Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Substantive Issues of a Patent Case
  • § 1:1 : Introduction1-3
    • § 1:1.1 : Generally1-3
    • § 1:1.2 : The 1952 and 2011 Patent Acts1-4
  • § 1:2 : Elements of a Patent Owner’s Case1-4
    • § 1:2.1 : Title and Right to Sue1-4
      • [A] : Establishing Chain of Title1-4
      • [B] : Right of Exclusive Licensee to Sue1-6
    • § 1:2.2 : Proof of Infringement1-7
      • [A] : Burden of Proof1-7
      • [B] : Acts of Infringement1-7
        • [B][1] : Direct Infringement Within the United States1-7
        • [B][2] : Infringement with Extraterritorial Component1-7
        • [B][3] : Induced and Contributory Infringement1-9
        • [B][4] : Contributory Infringement1-11
        • [B][5] : Other Acts of Infringement1-11
        • [B][6] : Joint Infringement1-12
      • [C] : Infringement of a Utility Patent1-12
        • [C][1] : Literal Infringement of a Patent Claim1-12
        • [C][2] : Claim Construction and Markman Proceedings1-13
        • [C][3] : Claims Containing a Means-Plus-Function Element1-14
        • [C][4] : Application of the Claim to the Accused Product or Process1-15
        • [C][5] : Infringement Under the Doctrine of Equivalents1-16
      • [D] : Infringement of a Design Patent1-18
      • [E] : Infringement of a Plant Patent1-20
    • § 1:2.3 : Validity of the Patent1-20
      • [A] : Presumed Validity of Each Patent Claim1-20
      • [B] : Burden of Proof in Attacking Validity and Enforceability1-22
      • [C] : Right to an Earlier Effective Filing Date1-24
    • § 1:2.4 : Remedies1-26
  • § 1:3 : Defenses of Accused Infringer1-27
    • § 1:3.1 : License and Assignment Defenses1-27
      • [A] : Licensee Estoppel Abrogation and Exceptions1-27
      • [B] : Implied License1-28
    • § 1:3.2 : Noninfringement Defenses1-29
      • [A] : No Literal Infringement1-29
      • [B] : Limitations on the Doctrine of Equivalents1-29
        • [B][1] : Prosecution History Estoppel1-29
        • [B][2] : Prior Art As Limitation1-31
        • [B][3] : Disclosed But Unclaimed Embodiments1-31
      • [C] : Functionality Defense to Design Patent Infringement1-32
      • [D] : Repair Versus Reconstruction1-32
      • [E] : ANDA1-33
      • [F] : Prior Commercial Use Defense (Patents Subject to the 2011 Act)1-33
    • § 1:3.3 : Defenses Against Patent Validity1-34
      • [A] : Expiration for Nonpayment of Maintenance Fees1-34
      • [B] : Collateral Estoppel by Prior Adjudication of Invalidity1-35
      • [C] : Lack of Novelty over the Prior Art Under Section 1021-35
        • [C][1] : The 1952 and 2011 Acts Differ in the Prior Art Applicable to Applications Filed Before and After March 16, 20131-36
      • [D] : Prior Art Under the 1952 Act1-37
        • [D][1] : Sections 102(a) and (b)1-37
        • [D][2] : Section 102(e)1-43
        • [D][3] : Section 102(g)1-43
      • [E] : Prior Art Under the 2011 Act1-45
        • [E][1] : Changes Expanding Prior Art1-46
        • [E][2] : One-Year Grace Period re Disclosures from the Inventor1-47
        • [E][3] : Derivation Proceedings Created; Interferences Eliminated1-47
        • [E][4] : Subsections of Sections 102 and 104 Dropped by the 2011 Act1-48
        • [E][5] : Tax Strategies Deemed Insufficient to Differentiate from the Prior Art1-48
        • [E][6] : Best Mode Still Required but No Longer an Invalidity Defense1-49
      • [F] : Obviousness (§ 103)1-49
        • [F][1] : Graham v. Deere and KSR Analyses1-49
        • [F][2] : Objective Evidence re Obviousness1-52
        • [F][3] : Obvious at What Time?1-53
      • [G] : Misnamed Inventorship1-54
      • [H] : Inadequately Disclosed or Claimed (§ 112)1-54
        • [H][1] : Enablement1-55
        • [H][2] : Best Mode1-56
        • [H][3] : Written Description1-57
      • [I] : Abandonment1-57
      • [J] : Double Patenting1-58
      • [K] : Nonstatutory Subject Matter or Inoperativeness1-59
    • § 1:3.4 : Defenses of Patent Unenforceability1-62
      • [A] : Inequitable Conduct Before the PTO1-62
        • [A][1] : Inequitable Conduct Generally1-62
        • [A][2] : Materiality1-63
        • [A][3] : Intent to Deceive1-65
        • [A][4] : Consequences of Inequitable Conduct1-67
      • [B] : Laches and Equitable Estoppel1-68
        • [B][1] : In Litigation1-68
        • [B][2] : Laches in Patent Prosecution1-69
      • [C] : Patent Misuse1-69
        • [C][1] : Tying Unpatented Supplies1-70
        • [C][2] : Compulsory Package Licensing1-71
        • [C][3] : Price Fixing, Field of Use, Territorial, and Post-Sale Restrictions1-72
        • [C][4] : 1988 Patent Misuse Reform Act1-72
    • § 1:3.5 : Patent Exhaustion1-73
  • § 1:4 : Immunity of States1-74
  • § 1:5 : Claims Against a Patent Owner1-75
    • § 1:5.1 : Challenges to Patent Liability, Inventorship, or Validity1-75
      • [A] : For Declaratory Judgment1-75
      • [B] : To Reform Inventorship Under 35 U.S.C. § 2561-75
      • [C] : Challenging Validity by PTO Reexamination1-75
    • § 1:5.2 : Claims for Damages Caused by Abuse of Patent Rights1-76
      • [A] : Unfair Competition Basis1-76
      • [B] : Antitrust Violation Basis1-77
        • [B][1] : Fraud on the PTO1-77
        • [B][2] : After an “Objectively Baseless” Prior Suit1-77
        • [B][3] : Reverse Payment Settlement1-78
      • [C] : Standards-Setting Issues1-79
Chapter 2: Investigation Needed Before Bringing Suit John M Skenyon ~ Fish & Richardson
  • § 2:1 : From Suspicion of Infringement to Adequate Investigation2-2
    • § 2:1.1 : Meeting the Requirements of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure2-3
      • [A] : Claim Construction2-7
  • [B] : Comparing the Construed Claims with the Accused Product or Process2-11
  • [C] : Other Areas to Investigate2-17
  • [D] : Nonpracticing Entities2-18
  • § 2:1.2 : Pre-Suit Opinion Letter2-20
  • § 2:1.3 : Risk of Laches After the Duty to Inquire Arises2-21
  • § 2:2 : Forming a Strategy to Achieve the Business Objective2-22
    • § 2:2.1 : Is Injunction or Licensing the Goal?2-22
    • § 2:2.2 : How Extensive Are Damages So Far and How Extensive Might They Become?2-23
    • § 2:2.3 : Does Management Have the Fortitude for a Long Haul?2-24
    • § 2:2.4 : Should the Patent Owner Move for a Preliminary Injunction?2-25
  • § 2:3 : Selection of Litigation Team and Experts2-28
    • § 2:3.1 : Pre-Suit Investigation Team2-28
    • § 2:3.2 : Fee Arrangements2-29
    • § 2:3.3 : Selecting Experts2-31
  • § 2:4 : Patent Owner’s Pre-Suit Search for Weaknesses in Its Case2-33
    • § 2:4.1 : Title and Right to Sue Problems2-33
    • § 2:4.2 : Maintenance Fees2-38
    • § 2:4.3 : Marking and Notice Problems2-39
    • § 2:4.4 : On Sale and Public Use Problems2-41
      • [A] : Patents Filed Before March 16, 20132-41
      • [B] : Patents Filed After March 16, 20132-43
    • § 2:4.5 : Inequitable Conduct Problems2-43
    • § 2:4.6 : Conferring with Likely Witnesses2-44
    • § 2:4.7 : Documents2-45
      • [A] : Locating Important Documents2-45
      • [B] : Spoliation Problems2-46
    • § 2:4.8 : Purging Misuse Problems2-47
    • § 2:4.9 : Whether Derivation Is an Issue2-47
  • § 2:5 : Whether the Patent Position Should Be Strengthened Before Suit2-48
    • § 2:5.1 : Ex Parte Reexamination2-48
    • § 2:5.2 : Reissue2-49
    • § 2:5.3 : Supplemental Examination Under AIA2-51
  • § 2:5.4 : Continuation Practice2-51
  • § 2:6 : Contacting the Infringer or Its Customers Before Filing Suit2-52
    • § 2:6.1 : Reasons for Notice2-53
    • § 2:6.2 : The Risks of Giving Notice2-53
  • § 2:7 : Patent Owner’s Choices2-54
    • § 2:7.1 : Choice of Defendants2-54
    • § 2:7.2 : Choice of Venue2-55
      • [A] : Joinder of Unrelated Defendants in One Venue Narrowed by AIA2-56
    • § 2:7.3 : Choice of Jury or Bench Trial2-57
  • § 2:8 : Defendant’s Choices2-58
    • § 2:8.1 : Meeting the Requirements of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure2-58
    • § 2:8.2 : Whether Prior Commercial Use Is Available Against Infringement2-59
    • § 2:8.3 : Preemptive Strike by Declaratory Judgment2-59
    • § 2:8.3 : Whether to Attack Validity in Court or in the PTO2-60
    • § 2:8.5 : Settlement and Defensive Materials2-60
    • § 2:8.6 : Is Another Entity Responsible?2-61
    • § 2:8.7 : Design Around2-61
Chapter 3: Opening Phase Kenneth J Weatherwax ~ Irell & Manella LLP
Andrei Iancu ~ Irell & Manella LLP
  • § 3:1 : Introduction3-2
  • § 3:2 : Complaint3-2
    • § 3:2.1 : Essentials of the Complaint3-2
    • § 3:2.2 : Pendent State Law Claims3-8
    • § 3:2.3 : Declaratory Judgment Actions3-8
  • § 3:3 : Answer3-10
    • § 3:3.1 : Essentials of the Answer3-10
    • § 3:3.2 : Pleading Inequitable Conduct3-11
    • § 3:3.3 : Counterclaims3-13
  • § 3:4 : Jurisdiction, Venue, and Transfer3-16
    • § 3:4.1 : Subject Matter Jurisdiction3-16
      • [A] : “Arising Under” Jurisdiction3-16
      • [B] : Pendent Jurisdiction3-19
      • [C] : Declaratory Judgment Jurisdiction3-19
    • § 3:4.2 : Personal Jurisdiction3-22
    • § 3:4.3 : Venue3-26
    • § 3:4.4 : Suits for Patent Infringement Against a Government Entity3-31
  • § 3:5 : Procedural Motions in the Opening Phase3-32
    • § 3:5.1 : Rule 12(b) and 12(e) Motions3-32
    • § 3:5.2 : Motions re Indispensable Parties3-34
    • § 3:5.3 : Motions to Bifurcate3-35
    • § 3:5.4 : Transfer Motions3-39
    • § 3:5.5 : Motion to Recuse3-41
    • § 3:5.6 : Motions for Expedited Relief/Ex Parte Application3-43
  • § 3:6 : Early Meeting of Counsel Under Rule 26 and Local Rules3-43
  • § 3:7 : Protective Orders to Protect Confidential Information3-46
  • § 3:8 : Early Neutral Evaluation Procedures3-51
  • § 3:9 : Relations with Opposing Counsel3-52
Chapter 4: Discovery and Privilege Brian E. Ferguson ~ Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
  • § 4:1 : Introduction4-4
    • § 4:1.1 : Purpose of This Chapter4-4
    • § 4:1.2 : Source of Discovery Rules4-4
  • § 4:2 : General Objectives of Discovery in Patent Cases4-4
    • § 4:2.1 : In General4-4
    • § 4:2.2 : Discovery Objectives for a Patentee4-5
    • § 4:2.3 : Discovery Objectives for an Accused Infringer4-8
  • § 4:3 : Scope of Discovery4-10
  • § 4:4 : Mandatory Disclosures4-11
    • § 4:4.1 : In General4-11
    • § 4:4.2 : Initial Conference of Counsel and Report Thereon—Rule 26(f)4-11
      • [A] : In General4-11
      • [B] : Subject of Conference4-12
      • [C] : Report on Proposed Discovery Plan4-13
      • [D] : Patent Infringement Cases4-13
    • § 4:4.3 : Initial Disclosures—Rule 26(a)(1)4-15
      • [A] : In General4-15
      • [B] : Subject of Disclosure4-15
      • [C] : Duty of Supplementation4-16
      • [D] : Initial Disclosures in Patent Infringement Cases4-16
    • § 4:4.4 : Disclosure of Expert Testimony—Rule 26(a)(2)4-18
      • [A] : In General4-18
      • [B] : Subject of Disclosure4-18
      • [C] : Expert Disclosures in Patent Cases4-19
    • § 4:4.5 : Pretrial Disclosures and Objections Thereto—Rule 26(a)(3)4-22
      • [A] : In General4-22
      • [B] : Subject of Disclosure4-22
      • [C] : Subject of the Objections4-23
    • § 4:4.6 : Notice of Prior Art Used in Defense4-23
  • § 4:5 : Requests for Production of Documents and Things and Inspection—Rule 344-24
    • § 4:5.1 : Requests for Production4-24
    • § 4:5.2 : Responses to Requests for Production4-25
    • § 4:5.3 : Duty of Supplementation of Responses to Requests for Production4-26
      • [A] : Requests for Production in Patent Cases4-27
  • § 4:6 : Interrogatories4-27
    • § 4:6.1 : In General4-27
    • § 4:6.2 : Scope of Interrogatories4-27
    • § 4:6.3 : Scope of Interrogatories in an Infringement Case4-28
    • § 4:6.4 : Interrogatory Responses4-30
    • § 4:6.5 : Duty of Supplementation of Interrogatory Responses4-31
  • § 4:7 : Requests for Admissions4-31
    • § 4:7.1 : Procedure for Requests4-31
    • § 4:7.2 : Procedure for Responses4-32
    • § 4:7.3 : Content of Responses4-32
    • § 4:7.4 : Effect of Admissions4-33
    • § 4:7.5 : Duty of Supplementation of Responses4-33
    • § 4:7.6 : Use of Requests for Admissions in Patent Infringement Cases4-33
  • § 4:8 : Depositions4-34
    • § 4:8.1 : Purpose and Advantages4-34
      • [A] : Pre-Deposition Planning4-35
      • [B] : Deposition Tactics and Pointers4-36
      • [C] : Preparing a Witness to Give a Deposition4-37
      • [D] : Waiver Problems Associated with Use of Documents in Witness Preparation4-38
      • [E] : Defending Depositions and Typical Objections4-40
      • [F] : Rule 31—Depositions upon Written Questions4-40
      • [G] : Place of Deposition4-41
    • § 4:8.2 : Video Depositions4-41
    • § 4:8.3 : Subject Matter of Depositions by Type of Witness and Deposition4-42
      • [A] : Deposing Rule 30(b)(6) Witnesses4-42
      • [B] : Deposing Fact Witnesses4-43
      • [C] : Topics Covered by Patentee in Depositions4-44
      • [D] : Topics Covered by Accused Infringer in Depositions4-45
      • [E] : Deposing a Patent Examiner4-46
    • § 4:8.4 : Deposing Expert Witnesses4-47
      • [A] : Expert Witnesses and Required Expert Reports4-47
      • [B] : Tips for Deposing Experts4-49
      • [C] : Time of Taking4-50
    • § 4:8.5 : Restrictions on Depositions4-50
      • [A] : Total Number of Depositions4-50
      • [B] : Number of Depositions of a Single Person4-50
      • [C] : Schedule and Duration4-50
      • [D] : Judge on the Case or in the Discovery Locale4-51
    • § 4:8.6 : Instructions Not to Answer/Allowable Testimony4-51
      • [A] : Questions Regarding Legal Opinion or Conclusion4-52
      • [B] : Questions Regarding Interpretation of Claims4-52
    • § 4:8.7 : Dealing with Abuse or Obstruction4-55
    • § 4:8.8 : Compelling Appearance/Testimony4-56
      • [A] : Compelling the Witness to Appear4-56
      • [B] : Compelling Answers at a Deposition4-56
  • § 4:9 : Rule 45 Subpoenas to Nonparties4-57
    • § 4:9.1 : Subpoenas in General4-57
    • § 4:9.2 : Subpoenas in Patent Infringement Cases4-58
    • § 4:9.3 : Response to Subpoenas4-59
  • § 4:10 : Self-Help Discovery4-59
  • § 4:11 : Limitations on Discovery4-61
    • § 4:11.1 : Burdensome Discovery4-61
    • § 4:11.2 : Claims of Privilege or Protection of Trial Preparation Materials4-62
      • [A] : In General4-62
    • § 4:11.3 : Trial Preparation Materials in General4-63
    • § 4:11.4 : Discovery of Nontestifying Experts4-63
      • [A] : Documents/Information Generated During Prosecution4-63
    • § 4:11.5 : Invention Disclosures4-66
      • [A] : Opinions of Counsel to Rebut Charge of Willful Infringement4-66
  • § 4:12 : Motions for Protective Order4-71
    • § 4:12.1 : Grounds for a Protective Order4-71
    • § 4:12.2 : Procedure for Moving for a Protective Order4-72
    • § 4:12.3 : Stipulated Protective Order Regarding Confidential Information4-72
  • § 4:13 : Discovery Motion Practice and Sanctions4-75
    • § 4:13.1 : Rule 37 Motion to Compel4-75
      • [A] : Prior to a Motion to Compel4-75
      • [B] : Filing a Motion to Compel4-75
      • [C] : Delay or Failure to File Motion to Compel4-76
      • [D] : Opposing a Motion to Compel4-77
      • [E] : Recovery of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs4-77
      • [F] : Failure to Comply with an Order to Compel4-78
    • § 4:13.2 : Sanctions Available Without a Discovery Order4-80
    • § 4:13.3 : Failure to Provide Electronically Stored Information4-80
    • § 4:13.4 : Spoliation of Evidence4-80
    • § 4:13.5 : Rule 26(g) Motions4-82
    • § 4:13.6 : Miscellaneous Other Discovery Motions4-83
      • [A] : Extensions of Time4-83
      • [B] : Motion to Be Relieved of Admissions4-85
    • § 4:13.7 : Appeals from Discovery Orders4-85
Chapter 5: Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Immunity Patricia A. Martone ~ Morrison & Foerester LLP
  • § 5:1 : Introduction5-2
  • § 5:2 : Attorney-Client Privilege5-3
    • § 5:2.1 : Defining the Privilege5-3
    • § 5:2.2 : Resolving Disputes5-4
    • § 5:2.3 : Attorney-Client Privilege Issues Typical in Patent Litigation5-5
      • [A] : Who Qualifies As an Attorney?5-5
        • [A][1] : Attorneys Who Prosecute Patent Applications5-5
        • [A][2] : Patent Agents Registered to Practice Before the PTO5-6
        • [A][3] : Foreign Patent Agents5-8
          • [A][3][a] : Courts Extending the Privilege to Communications with Foreign Nonattorney Patent Agents5-8
          • [A][3][b] : The U.K. As an Example5-12
          • [A][3][c] : Courts Denying the Privilege to Communications with Foreign Patent Agents5-13
      • [B] : What Types of Communications Are Protected?5-14
        • [B][1] : Prosecution Documents5-14
          • [B][1][a] : The Jack Winter Line of Cases5-15
          • [B][1][b] : The Knogo Line of Cases5-16
          • [B][1][c] : More Recent Federal Circuit Law5-18
        • [B][2] : Opinion Letters5-19
        • [B][3] : Licensing and Settlement Documents5-21
      • [C] : Who Qualifies As a Client?5-22
  • § 5:3 : Attorney Work Product Immunity5-24
    • § 5:3.1 : Defining the Immunity5-24
    • § 5:3.2 : Resolving Disputes5-26
    • § 5:3.3 : The Immunity in Patent Litigation5-26
    • § 5:3.4 : “Anticipation of Litigation”5-26
    • § 5:3.5 : Typical Documents in Patent Litigation5-29
      • [A] : Opinion Letters5-29
      • [B] : Patent Prosecution Documents5-30
      • [C] : Patent Prosecution Documents Prepared by Patent Agents5-31
      • [D] : Pre-Suit Investigations5-32
      • [E] : Licensing and Settlement5-32
      • [F] : Party or Party Representative5-33
  • § 5:4 : Waiver of Attorney-Client Privilege5-33
    • § 5:4.1 : Generally5-33
    • § 5:4.2 : Inadvertent Waiver5-35
    • § 5:4.3 : Intentional Waiver5-41
      • [A] : Willful Infringement; Inducement of Infringement5-41
      • [B] : Inequitable Conduct5-48
      • [C] : Estoppel5-50
    • § 5:4.4 : Timing and Scope of Intentional Waiver5-52
    • § 5:4.5 : Waiver Resulting from Corporate Transactions5-53
  • § 5:5 : Waiver of Work Product Immunity5-58
    • § 5:5.1 : Generally5-58
    • § 5:5.2 : Inadvertent Waiver5-58
    • § 5:5.3 : Intentional Waiver5-60
      • [A] : Willful Infringement5-60
      • [B] : Disclosing Work Product to Experts5-63
  • § 5:6 : Piercing the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Immunity5-65
  • § 5:7 : Conclusion5-66
Chapter 6: Organization, Vendor Support, and Cost Control Stephen F Sherry ~ McAndrews Held & Malloy Ltd
Timothy J Malloy ~ McAndrews Held & Malloy Ltd
Kirk A Vander Leest ~ McAndrews Held & Malloy Ltd
  • § 6:1 : Developing a Central Organizational Framework for the Case6-2
  • § 6:2 : Organizing a Trial Team6-9
    • § 6:2.1 : Team Leaders6-9
    • § 6:2.2 : Other Lawyers6-11
    • § 6:2.3 : Local Counsel6-11
    • § 6:2.4 : In-House Counsel6-12
    • § 6:2.5 : Temporary Personnel6-12
    • § 6:2.6 : Turnover6-13
  • § 6:3 : Document Organization and Retrieval6-13
    • § 6:3.1 : Electronic Case Management and Filing6-14
    • § 6:3.2 : Micro Versus Macro Document Management6-14
    • § 6:3.3 : Indexing Categories6-15
    • § 6:3.4 : Control Numbers and Copying6-16
    • § 6:3.5 : Imaging Systems6-18
    • § 6:3.6 : Considerations Regarding Electronic Discovery6-19
  • § 6:4 : Organizing Deposition Materials6-22
    • § 6:4.1 : Planning6-22
    • § 6:4.2 : Taking the Deposition, Indexing, and Digesting6-23
    • § 6:4.3 : Videotaping Depositions6-24
    • § 6:4.4 : Using Deposition Testimony6-26
  • § 6:5 : Using Database Systems6-26
  • § 6:6 : Obtaining Patent Materials6-29
  • § 6:7 : Obtaining a Claim Construction Ruling6-31
  • § 6:8 : Creating Demonstrative Exhibits and Videos6-32
  • § 6:9 : Jury Consultants6-35
  • § 6:10 : Other Litigation Support Vendors6-38
    • § 6:10.1 : Copying Services6-38
    • § 6:10.2 : Graphics Services6-39
    • § 6:10.3 : Services for the Electronic Courtroom6-40
  • § 6:11 : Budgeting and Cost Control6-42
Chapter 7: Nondiscovery Motions and Court-Initiated Procedures Gary M. Hoffman ~ Dickstein Shapiro LLP
Charles W Saber ~ Dickstein Shapiro Morin & Oshinsky LLP
Dipu A Doshi ~ Dickstein Shapiro Morin & Oshinsky LLP
  • § 7:1 : Introduction7-2
  • § 7:2 : Markman Proceedings for Claim Interpretation7-3
    • § 7:2.1 : Markman in General7-3
    • § 7:2.2 : When a Markman Determination Is Necessary7-5
    • § 7:2.3 : Procedural Contexts in Which Claim Interpretation Arises7-7
    • § 7:2.4 : Evidence Considered in Determining Claim Construction7-10
    • § 7:2.5 : Manner in Which Courts Construe Claims7-12
    • § 7:2.6 : Role of Witnesses7-25
    • § 7:2.7 : Use of Court-Appointed Experts7-27
    • § 7:2.8 : Necessity of a Hearing to Decide Claim Construction7-29
    • § 7:2.9 : Timing of Markman Hearings7-29
    • § 7:2.10 : Timing Established by Local Rules7-33
    • § 7:2.11 : Appeal of Claim Construction Decisions7-37
  • § 7:3 : Summary Judgment Motions7-40
    • § 7:3.1 : Introduction7-40
    • § 7:3.2 : Summary Judgment Motions by the Patentee7-41
    • § 7:3.3 : Summary Judgment for the Accused Infringer7-43
    • § 7:3.4 : Procedural Aspects of Motions for Summary Judgment7-45
  • § 7:4 : Nondiscovery Procedural Motions7-47
    • § 7:4.1 : Introduction7-47
    • § 7:4.2 : Motion for Separate Trials (Bifurcation)7-47
    • § 7:4.3 : Motion for Appointment of a Special Master7-50
    • § 7:4.4 : Motions for Leave to Amend7-51
  • § 7:5 : Pretrial and Scheduling Conferences7-53
    • § 7:5.1 : Initial Scheduling Order7-53
  • § 7:6 : Court-Initiated Settlement Procedures7-54
    • § 7:6.1 : Alternative Dispute Resolution Programs Used by Federal District Courts7-54
    • § 7:6.2 : Court-Initiated ADR Programs in Patent Cases7-57
Chapter 8: Witnesses Special to a Patent Case Mark T Banner ~ Banner & Witcoff Ltd
Christopher J. Renk ~ Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.
Ted L Field ~ South Texas College of Law
  • § 8:1 : Introduction8-2
  • § 8:2 : The Inventor8-4
    • § 8:2.1 : The Patent Owner’s Approach to the Inventor8-4
      • [A] : The Inventor’s Role in a Patent Owner’s Case8-5
      • [B] : Inventor Problems and Overcoming Them8-7
    • § 8:2.2 : The Defendant’s Approach to the Inventor8-12
    • § 8:2.3 : The Hostile Inventor8-17
  • § 8:3 : Expert Witnesses8-17
    • § 8:3.1 : Qualifying Experts at Trial and Presenting Their Opinions8-20
    • § 8:3.2 : Technical Expert8-31
    • § 8:3.3 : Patent Law Expert8-40
    • § 8:3.4 : Damages Expert8-45
    • § 8:3.5 : Deposition of Experts8-49
    • § 8:3.6 : Non-Testifying Experts8-50
  • § 8:4 : Fact Witnesses8-52
    • § 8:4.1 : Designers of Accused Infringing Products8-52
    • § 8:4.2 : Nonparty Invalidity Witness8-54
    • § 8:4.3 : Witness Regarding Inequitable Conduct Before the PTO8-58
    • § 8:4.4 : The Willfulness Witness8-60
Chapter 9: Damages and Attorney Fees
  • § 9:1 : Statutory Basis9-3
    • § 9:1.1 : Damages on U.S. Sales of Components Used Overseas in a Process Patented in the United States9-3
    • § 9:1.2 : Damages Base and Exclusions9-4
  • § 9:2 : Determination of Liability Period9-5
    • § 9:2.1 : Start and End of Patent Term9-5
    • § 9:2.2 : Start and End of Infringement9-5
    • § 9:2.3 : Six-Year Pre-Complaint Limitation9-7
    • § 9:2.4 : Limitations Imposed by the Patent Marking Statute9-7
  • § 9:3 : Tests for Entitlement to a Lost Profit Measure of Damages9-8
    • § 9:3.1 : Requirement for Causation Generally9-8
    • § 9:3.2 : Panduit Test for Lost Profits9-10
      • [A] : Demand for Patented Product9-10
      • [B] : Absence of Acceptable Noninfringing Substitute9-11
      • [C] : Capacity9-13
      • [D] : Quantum of Lost Profits9-14
    • § 9:3.3 : Alternatives to Panduit Test9-14
    • § 9:3.4 : Lost Profits or Infringers’ Profits on a Design Patent9-15
  • § 9:4 : Calculation of Amount of Lost Profits9-15
    • § 9:4.1 : Profits on the Patented Product Lost to the Infringing Products9-15
    • § 9:4.2 : Profits on Unpatented Products Sold by the Patentee Lost to Infringing Products9-16
    • § 9:4.3 : Profits on Ancillary Products Meeting the Entire Market Value Test9-17
    • § 9:4.4 : Profits Lost Due to Price Erosion Damages9-18
  • § 9:5 : Reasonable-Royalty Measure of Recovery9-20
    • § 9:5.1 : Reasonable Royalty Based on Hypothetical Pre-Infringement Negotiations9-20
    • § 9:5.2 : Reasonable Royalty Based on a Fraction of the Patentee’s Lost Profits9-21
    • § 9:5.3 : Reasonable Royalty Based on a Fraction of Infringer’s Anticipated Profit9-23
    • § 9:5.4 : Reasonable Royalty Limited by the Differential Cost of Using an Alternative Noninfringing Technology9-23
    • § 9:5.5 : Reasonable Royalty Based on a Flat Fee or Milestone Payments9-23
    • § 9:5.6 : Georgia-Pacific Factors9-24
    • § 9:5.7 : Blended Damages Award of Lost Profits and Reasonable Royalty Based on Market Share9-26
    • § 9:5.8 : Liquidated Damages Against Violating Licensee9-27
    • § 9:5.9 : Compelled Royalty for a Winning Patentee After Denial of a Permanent Injunction9-27
  • § 9:6 : Proving the Amount of Damages9-29
    • § 9:6.1 : Foundational Fact Evidence of Damages9-29
      • [A] : Sales and Marketing Fact Witnesses9-29
      • [B] : Adverse Witnesses Employed by the Infringer9-30
      • [C] : Licensing Witnesses9-30
      • [D] : Capacity Witnesses9-31
    • § 9:6.2 : Use of a Damages Expert9-31
      • [A] : Selection of a Damages Expert9-31
      • [B] : Expert’s Team9-32
      • [C] : Protection of Attorney Work Product9-33
      • [D] : Procedural Issues re Damages Evidence9-33
  • § 9:7 : Effect of Bifurcation on Trial of Damages9-33
  • § 9:8 : Demonstrative Exhibits9-35
  • § 9:9 : Prejudgment Interest9-35
  • § 9:10 : Increased Damages9-37
    • § 9:10.1 : Willfulness and Who Determines It9-37
    • § 9:10.2 : Willfulness = Objective Recklessness9-37
    • § 9:10.3 : Judicial Discretion on Enhancement9-39
    • § 9:10.4 : Privilege and Disqualification9-40
    • § 9:10.5 : Requirements for Opinion Adequacy9-42
      • [A] : Competence and Comprehensiveness9-43
      • [B] : Timeliness9-44
  • § 9:11 : Award of Attorney Fees9-45
  • § 9:12 : False Marking9-47
    • § 9:12.1 : Under 1952 Act9-47
    • § 9:12.2 : Under 2011 Act9-48
Chapter 10: Injunctions John F Sweeney ~ Morgan & Finnegan LLP
  • § 10:1 : Introduction10-2
    • § 10:1.1 : Types of Injunctions10-2
    • § 10:1.2 : Statutory Basis for Injunctive Relief10-4
  • § 10:2 : Historical Origins of Injunctive Relief10-7
  • § 10:3 : Injunctive Relief in Patent Law Prior to the Federal Circuit10-9
  • § 10:4 : Preliminary Injunctions10-9
    • § 10:4.1 : Preliminary Injunction Hearing10-11
    • § 10:4.2 : Likelihood of Success on the Merits10-12
    • § 10:4.3 : Irreparable Harm10-16
    • § 10:4.4 : Balance of Hardships Between the Parties10-18
    • § 10:4.5 : Public Interest10-19
    • § 10:4.6 : Posting of Bond10-20
    • § 10:4.7 : Standard of Review10-21
  • § 10:5 : Persons Bound by Injunction10-23
  • § 10:6 : Permanent Injunctions10-24
    • § 10:6.1 : Public Interest Implications10-28
    • § 10:6.2 : Scope of Injunctive Relief10-29
  • § 10:7 : Enforcement of Injunctions10-31
  • § 10:8 : Unclean Hands10-33
  • § 10:9 : Laches, Acquiescence, and Delay10-34
  • § 10:10 : Relation of Injunctive Relief to Jury Trial10-34
    • § 10:10.1 : Injunctive Relief and Assertion of Invalidity and Noninfringement10-35
    • § 10:10.2 : Injunctive Relief and Damages10-39
  • § 10:11 : Tactical Considerations Concerning Applications for Preliminary Injunctive Relief10-40
    • § 10:11.1 : Application for a TRO Versus a Motion for Preliminary Injunction10-40
    • § 10:11.2 : Discovery in the Context of a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction10-41
  • § 10:12 : Conclusion10-42
Chapter 11: Pretrial Proceedings Don W Martens ~ Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP
John B Sganga ~ Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP
  • § 11:1 : Introduction11-2
  • § 11:2 : Establish the Theme of Your Case11-3
    • § 11:2.1 : Theme of Patent Owner’s Case11-3
    • § 11:2.2 : Theme of Accused Infringer’s Case11-4
    • § 11:2.3 : Building on the Theme11-4
  • § 11:3 : Pretrial Conference and Associated Filings11-5
    • § 11:3.1 : Exhibit Lists and Objections11-5
    • § 11:3.2 : Witness List11-7
    • § 11:3.3 : Designations of Deposition Testimony11-9
    • § 11:3.4 : Memorandum of Contentions of Fact and Law11-11
    • § 11:3.5 : Joint Pretrial Order11-12
    • § 11:3.6 : Pretrial Conference11-13
    • § 11:3.7 : Trial Brief11-13
    • § 11:3.8 : Filings Unique to the Bench Trial11-14
  • § 11:4 : Additional Filings and Hearings for Jury Trials11-15
    • § 11:4.1 : Jury Instructions11-15
    • § 11:4.2 : Verdict Form and Special Interrogatories11-16
    • § 11:4.3 : Voir Dire Questions11-17
  • § 11:5 : Section 282 Notice of Prior Art11-17
  • § 11:6 : Motions in Limine and Bench Briefs11-18
  • § 11:7 : Other Motions, or Stipulations, Related to Trial Conduct11-19
    • § 11:7.1 : Set Order of Proofs11-19
    • § 11:7.2 : Sequestering Witnesses11-20
    • § 11:7.3 : Protective Order Regarding Confidential Documents11-20
    • § 11:7.4 : Permit and Regulate Use of Electronic Presentation Media11-21
  • § 11:8 : Logistical Arrangements with the Court11-22
    • § 11:8.1 : Viewing the Courtroom11-22
    • § 11:8.2 : Equipment and File Setup in the Courtroom11-23
    • § 11:8.3 : Exhibit Tagging11-23
    • § 11:8.4 : Ascertaining Exhibit Procedures Required by Judge11-23
    • § 11:8.5 : Arrangements for Daily Transcripts11-23
  • § 11:9 : Preparing Witnesses for Trial11-24
  • § 11:10 : Preparation of Internal Documentation11-25
    • § 11:10.1 : Opening Statement and Closing Argument11-25
    • § 11:10.2 : Direct Testimony Outlines11-25
    • § 11:10.3 : Cross-Examination Testimony Outlines11-26
  • § 11:11 : Logistical Arrangements for the Trial Team11-26
    • § 11:11.1 : Setting Up a “War Room” for Trial11-26
    • § 11:11.2 : Staffing and Accommodations11-27
    • § 11:11.3 : Assigning Clear Lines of Responsibility11-27
    • § 11:11.4 : Trial Subpoenas and Witness Fees11-27
    • § 11:11.5 : Role of Local Counsel11-27
    • § 11:11.6 : Scheduling Witnesses11-28
    • § 11:11.7 : Arranging Local Copying and Local Litigation Graphics Support11-28
    • § 11:11.8 : Arranging for Visible Presence of Corporate Representatives at Trial11-28
Chapter 12: Trial Michael V Ciresi ~ Robins Kaplan Miller & Ciresi LLP
Cole Fauver ~ Robins Kaplan Miller & Ciresi LLP
David Beehler ~ Robins Kaplan Miller & Ciresi LLP
  • § 12:1 : Planning the Order of Presentation of Evidence12-3
    • § 12:1.1 : Patent Owner’s Case12-3
    • § 12:1.2 : Accused Infringer’s Case12-4
  • § 12:2 : Jury Matters12-7
    • § 12:2.1 : Juror Profile, Information, and Voir Dire12-7
    • § 12:2.2 : Use of Jury Consultants12-8
    • § 12:2.3 : Jury Instructions and Interrogatories12-10
    • § 12:2.4 : Verdict Forms12-12
  • § 12:3 : Trial Team12-14
    • § 12:3.1 : Organize a Core Group That Knows the Case Intimately12-14
    • § 12:3.2 : Project a Professional Attitude12-14
  • § 12:4 : Use of Electronic Courtroom Technology12-15
    • § 12:4.1 : Document Control and Display12-15
    • § 12:4.2 : Computer Graphics12-16
      • [A] : Persuasive Value12-16
      • [B] : Animations12-17
      • [C] : Cost12-18
      • [D] : Admissibility12-19
    • § 12:4.3 : Other Visual Aids12-22
    • § 12:4.4 : Real-Time Court Reporting12-23
  • § 12:5 : Opening Statements12-23
    • § 12:5.1 : For the Patent Owner12-24
      • [A] : The Story of the Inventors12-24
      • [B] : Disbelief12-24
      • [C] : Problem Solved/Tutorial12-24
      • [D] : How to Read a Patent12-24
      • [E] : Presumption of Validity12-25
      • [F] : Prior Art12-25
      • [G] : Experts12-25
    • § 12:5.2 : For the Accused Infringer12-25
  • § 12:6 : Testimony12-26
    • § 12:6.1 : Presentation of Live Witnesses on Direct12-26
      • [A] : Generally12-26
      • [B] : Witness Order12-27
      • [C] : Credibility and Appearance Factors12-27
      • [D] : Use of Adverse Witnesses for Your Own Case12-28
    • § 12:6.2 : Presentation of Testimony by Deposition, Including Use of Video Presentation12-31
    • § 12:6.3 : Qualifications and Voir Dire of Expert Witnesses12-32
      • [A] : Role of Experts After Markman12-32
      • [B] : Selecting Areas of Expertise12-35
        • [B][1] : Technical Experts12-35
        • [B][2] : Technical and Fact Experts12-36
        • [B][3] : Legal Experts12-36
        • [B][4] : Damages Experts12-37
      • [C] : Conclusion12-38
    • § 12:6.4 : Cross-Examination and Impeachment12-38
    • § 12:6.5 : Making Objections12-39
    • § 12:6.6 : Offers of Proof12-42
  • § 12:7 : Admission of Other Evidence and Use of Demonstrative Aids12-42
    • § 12:7.1 : Factual Exhibits12-42
    • § 12:7.2 : Summaries12-44
    • § 12:7.3 : Demonstrative Exhibits12-45
    • § 12:7.4 : Written Discovery Responses and Pretrial Statement Facts12-45
  • § 12:8 : Proof of Special Issues12-45
    • § 12:8.1 : Issues to Be Decided by the Court12-46
      • [A] : Equitable Estoppel and Inequitable Conduct12-46
      • [B] : Injunctive Relief12-46
      • [C] : Enhanced Damages12-46
      • [D] : Prejudgment and Post-Judgment Interest12-47
      • [E] : Attorneys’ Fees12-48
      • [F] : Section 112 Definiteness and Enablement12-48
    • § 12:8.2 : Issues to Be Decided by the Jury12-48
      • [A] : Infringement12-48
      • [B] : Novelty12-49
      • [C] : Nonobviousness12-49
      • [D] : Section 112 Best Mode12-49
      • [E] : Section 112 Written Description12-49
      • [F] : Damages12-49
      • [G] : Willfulness12-50
    • § 12:8.3 : Infringement, Doctrine of Equivalents, and Bars to the Doctrine12-50
      • [A] : Literal Infringement12-50
      • [B] : Infringement Under the Doctrine of Equivalents12-50
  • § 12:9 : Motions During Trial12-54
    • § 12:9.1 : Evidence Motions and Bench Briefs12-54
    • § 12:9.2 : Motions in Bench Trials12-55
    • § 12:9.3 : Motions Under Rule 615 to Sequester Witnesses12-56
    • § 12:9.4 : Motions for Judgment As a Matter of Law (JMOL)12-56
    • § 12:9.5 : Motions for New Trial12-60
  • § 12:10 : Closing Arguments12-62
  • § 12:11 : Post-Trial Motions12-63
    • § 12:11.1 : Rule 52 Amendments to the Findings12-63
    • § 12:11.2 : Rule 60 Proceedings for Relief from Judgment12-64
    • § 12:11.3 : Stays of Execution12-68
    • § 12:11.4 : Rule 74 Appeals from Magistrate Judge to District Judge12-70
    • § 12:11.5 : Standards for Overturning the Jury’s Verdict12-70
  • § 12:12 : Judgment12-70
Chapter 13: Appeal Allen M Sokal ~ Finnegan Henderson
James R Barney ~ Finnegan Henderson
  • § 13:1 : Introduction13-2
  • § 13:2 : The Federal Circuit in General13-3
    • § 13:2.1 : Origin and Structure of the Court13-3
    • § 13:2.2 : Mechanics of the Decision-Making Process13-4
  • § 13:3 : Jurisdictional Considerations: Subject Matter and Timing13-6
    • § 13:3.1 : When Do You Have a “Patent” Case?13-6
    • § 13:3.2 : When May You Approach the Federal Circuit for Relief?13-9
      • [A] : Final Decisions13-9
      • [B] : Complete Resolution of a Severable Part of the Case13-9
      • [C] : Interlocutory Appeals13-10
      • [D] : Collateral Order Doctrine13-11
      • [E] : Petitions for Extraordinary Writs13-12
  • § 13:4 : Law Applicable in Federal Circuit Appeals13-13
    • § 13:4.1 : Applicable Patent Precedents13-13
    • § 13:4.2 : Nonpatent Substantive Law13-15
    • § 13:4.3 : Applicable Procedural Law13-15
  • § 13:5 : Limitations on Appellate Review13-16
    • § 13:5.1 : Scope of Review13-16
    • § 13:5.2 : Limitation to Evidence, Argument, and Objections Advanced in the Trial Court Record13-20
  • § 13:6 : Pre-Appeal Actions in the Trial Court13-22
    • § 13:6.1 : Supplementation of the Record and Preservation of Issues13-22
    • § 13:6.2 : Obtaining an Appealable Order13-23
    • § 13:6.3 : Deciding Whether to Appeal at All13-24
    • § 13:6.4 : Motion to Stay Injunction or Execution of Judgment13-26
    • § 13:6.5 : Filing the Notice of Appeal13-27
    • § 13:6.6 : Consideration of Cross-Appeal13-27
  • § 13:7 : Procedural Matters in the Federal Circuit13-29
    • § 13:7.1 : Sequence, Content, and Timing of Submissions13-29
    • § 13:7.2 : Issue Selection13-31
    • § 13:7.3 : Practical Considerations in Briefing13-33
      • [A] : Statement of the Issues13-33
      • [B] : Statement of the Case13-34
      • [C] : Statement of the Facts13-34
      • [D] : Argument13-35
      • [E] : Summary of Argument13-36
      • [F] : Conclusion13-37
      • [G] : Appellee’s Brief13-37
      • [H] : Reply Brief13-38
  • § 13:8 : Oral Argument13-39
  • § 13:9 : Decision13-40
  • § 13:10 : Post-Decision Proceedings13-41
  • § 13:11 : Conclusion13-42
Chapter 14: Patent Litigation Other Than District Court Infringement Actions Jeffrey A Finn ~ Sidley Austin LLP
  • § 14:1 : Introduction14-2
  • § 14:2 : Litigation Against the U.S. Government for Compensation for Unauthorized Use of a Patent14-3
    • § 14:2.1 : Exclusive Jurisdiction in U.S. Court of Federal Claims14-3
    • § 14:2.2 : Position of Suppliers to the Government14-6
      • [A] : “By or for the United States”14-8
      • [B] : “Authorization or Consent”14-10
    • § 14:2.3 : Substantive Patent Principles and Controlling Precedent14-12
    • § 14:2.4 : Unavailability of Injunctive Relief and Jury14-13
    • § 14:2.5 : Procedure14-14
      • [A] : Rules of Court of Federal Claims Generally14-14
      • [B] : Nationwide Jurisdiction14-15
      • [C] : Commencement of Action in Court of Federal Claims14-15
      • [D] : Other Provisions of the RCFC That Deviate from the Federal Rules14-16
      • [E] : Statute of Limitations14-16
    • § 14:2.6 : Determination of Amount Awarded14-17
      • [A] : Reasonable Royalty14-18
        • [A][1] : Royalty Compensation Base Calculation14-18
        • [A][2] : Reasonable Royalty Rate Determination14-19
      • [B] : Lost Profits14-20
      • [C] : Percentage of Governmental Cost Savings14-21
      • [D] : Delay Damages14-22
    • § 14:2.7 : Defenses Special to Court of Claims Cases14-22
      • [A] : March-In Rights14-23
      • [B] : Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies14-23
    • § 14:2.8 : Appeal14-24
  • § 14:3 : Federal Civil Actions Arising Under the Patent Laws Other Than for Infringement14-24
    • § 14:3.1 : Under 35 U.S.C. § 145 to Obtain a Patent14-24
    • § 14:3.2 : Under 35 U.S.C. § 146 in Case of a Patent Interference14-26
    • § 14:3.3 : Under 35 U.S.C. § 291 Involving Interfering Patents14-28
    • § 14:3.4 : Under 35 U.S.C. § 256 to Correct Joinder of Inventor14-30
      • [A] : Substantive Requirements14-31
      • [B] : Burden of Proof14-32
      • [C] : Diligence14-33
  • § 14:4 : U.S. International Trade Commission14-33
    • § 14:4.1 : Introduction14-33
    • § 14:4.2 : Complaint14-37
    • § 14:4.3 : Response14-39
    • § 14:4.4 : Protective Order14-41
    • § 14:4.5 : Discovery in the ITC14-42
    • § 14:4.6 : ITC Motion Practice14-44
    • § 14:4.7 : Domestic Industry14-46
      • [A] : Domestic Industry Requirement Is Jurisdictional14-47
      • [B] : Domestic Industry Requirement Has Two Prongs That Must Be Satisfied14-48
        • [B][1] : Economic Prong14-48
        • [B][2] : Technical Prong14-49
    • § 14:4.8 : Hearing14-50
    • § 14:4.9 : Conclusion14-51
Chapter 15: Challenging Validity in the PTO Under the 2011 Patent Act Matthew I Kreeger ~ Morrison & Foerster LLP
Charles S. Barquist ~ Morrison & Foerster LLP
  • § 15:1 : Introduction15-2
  • § 15:2 : Ex Parte Reexamination15-4
  • § 15:3 : Inter Partes Review15-5
    • § 15:3.1 : Generally15-5
    • § 15:3.2 : Procedure15-5
      • [A] : Petition15-5
      • [B] : Decision15-7
      • [C] : Appeal15-9
    • § 15:3.3 : PTAB Trial Practice Rules15-9
    • § 15:3.4 : Differences from Prior Law15-10
    • § 15:3.5 : Effective Date15-12
    • § 15:3.6 : Estoppel15-12
    • § 15:3.7 : Litigation Stays Pending Inter Partes Review15-13
  • § 15:4 : Post-Grant Review15-13
    • § 15:4.1 : Generally15-13
    • § 15:4.2 : Procedure15-14
      • [A] : General15-14
      • [B] : Petition15-14
      • [C] : Decision15-18
      • [D] : Appeal15-20
    • § 15:4.3 : Estoppel15-20
    • § 15:4.4 : Litigation Stays Pending Post-Grant Review15-21
    • § 15:4.5 : PGRs Compared to Opposition Procedure at the European Patent Office15-22
      • [A] : Estoppel15-22
      • [B] : Basis for Initiating the Proceeding15-22
      • [C] : Procedures15-23
      • [D] : Appeal15-25
    • § 15:4.6 : Effective Date15-25
    • § 15:4.7 : Transitional Business Method Patent Review Process15-25
  • § 15:5 : Derivation Proceedings15-27
    • § 15:5.1 : Generally15-27
    • § 15:5.2 : Procedure15-28
      • [A] : Petition15-28
      • [B] : Decision15-30
      • [C] : Settlement15-30
      • [D] : Arbitration15-30
      • [E] : Public Availability of PTAB Records15-31
      • [F] : Appeal15-31
      • [G] : Derivation for Nonapplicants15-32
    • § 15:5.3 : Contrast with Interferences15-32
    • § 15:5.4 : Effective Date15-33
  • § 15:6 : Supplemental Examination15-34
    • § 15:6.1 : Generally15-34
    • § 15:6.2 : Procedure15-34
    • § 15:6.3 : Relation to Refutation of Inequitable Conduct and Fraud15-36
    • § 15:6.4 : Effective Date15-38
  • § 15:7 : Preissuance Third-Party Submissions15-38
    • § 15:7.1 : Procedure15-38
    • § 15:7.2 : Effective Date15-40
    • § 15:7.3 : Estoppel15-40
    • § 15:7.4 : Timing of Submissions15-41
  • § 15:8 : Burden of Proof in PTO Proceedings15-41
  • § 15:9 : Choosing Whether to Contest Validity in the Courts or in the PTO15-42
    • § 15:9.1 : Estoppel15-42
    • § 15:9.2 : Litigation Stay15-42
    • § 15:9.3 : Advantages of Inter Partes and Post-Grant Review to Concurrent Patent Infringement Defendants15-43
  Table of Authorities
  Index to Patent Litigation

  Please click here to view the latest update information for this title: Last Update Information  
 


  Please click here to view the Table of Authorities: Table of Authorities  
 

Print Share Email
News & Expert Analysis

June 18, 2013

SCOTUS Ending Term with Patent Decisions

From: Patent Law Practice Center

Over the past several days, the United States Supr...

June 13, 2013

Innovating for the Electric Car Economy

From: Patent Law Practice Center

Electric charging stations are an important part o...

June 10, 2013

USPTO Update: IP5 Meet, Patent Classification News, Pappas Leaving

From: Patent Law Practice Center

In this edition of USPTO Update: (1) World’s five ...

Related Seminars

Privacy and Data Security Law Institute (Fourteenth Annual)

Jun. 17 - 18, 2013

Employment Discrimination Law & Litigation 2013

Jun. 20, 2013

Audit Committees and Financial Reporting 2013: Recent Developments and Current Issues

Jun. 21, 2013

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • RSS
  • facebook
  • twitter

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2013 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.