Search

The article discusses the new joinder provision Title 35, Section 299 of the American Invents Act to the patent law in the U.S. It states that the provision allows parties of non-practicing entities (NPE) and accused infringers to be joined as defendants in one case. It says that accused infringers are joined only if a right to relief is asserted and common questions of fact will arise in the action. It adds NPEs have embraced the action of serial filing which are all alleging single defendant.

The article discusses the growth of issues related to the patent trolls which is a term used for a company or patent owner who does not manufacture or use the patented invention. It also discusses how patent lawyers can recognize patent troll along with various changes which have been made in the laws related to patent trolls in the U.S.

The discusses the issue concerning the potential existence of non-practicing Entities (NPEs) in China. These well-financed entities purchase intellectual property (IP) portfolios to sought simple vindication of their monetary claims of IP ownership against infringement. It mentions that NPEs assert their rights on IP against other industrialists who attempt to utilize the toll booth model pursued by individual investors. In china, litigation concerning NPE has not been practiced in the country.

The article discusses the legislation enacted by various states in the U.S. like Vermont, Virginia and Texas to combat patent trolling and factors for legal determination of bad faith in order to avoid potentially negative impact of an anti-trolling laws on legitimate patent infringement actions.

The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court cases Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc and Highmark Inc v. Allcare Health Management System, Inc which deals with patent trolls.

The article details the fees and opting out strategies for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and the new Unitary Patent (UP) in Europe. Topics include the UP translation and grant fees, higher renewal fee for five European member states (TOP5), the classical European Patent (EP) and national patent. Also discussed are the costs of UP litigation, the opt-out fee levels under UPC Agreement Article 83 and patent litigation of non-practicing entities (NPEs).

The article focuses on the issues concerning functional claiming in patent suits. The executive report "Patent assertion and U.S. innovation" released by U.S. President Barack Obama is highlighted which announces several legislative and executive actions to reduce abusive practices in patent litigation by patent owners known as "patent trolls." The different approaches on how to handle functional claiming in patent litigation are examined.

The article explores strategies and cost-saving approaches in U.S. patent litigation system against non-practicing entities (NPE). It mentions that ex parte and inter partes re-examination have been effective tools in making claims cancelled or getting it amended. It cites reference from the U.S. court case Eon-Net v. Flagstar Bancorp, where the winning party was awarded attorneys' fees and imposed sanctions.

The article presents the applications for non-practicing entities (NPEs) or patent assertion entities. The article discusses the tactics deployed by the NPEs like the effects of patent portfolio, costs of patent litigation, damages in patent litigation, etc. The article further mentions the strategies which both individuals and companies can consider to mitigate patent litigation risks.

The article presents the author's views on non-practising entities (NPE) which are companies that buy patents for licensing and litigating and research institutions that pump innovation back into the system, but have no ability to sell it. She discusses several court cases involving NPEs which are viewed as an avenue for inventors to receive recompense for their intellectual property. She comments that attention must be focused on addressing the loopholes in the patent litigation method. INSET: Just a software problem?.

The article discusses the issues regarding patent licensing, licensing for multinationals and non-practicing entity.

The article discusses how U.S. companies can defend themselves from a series of patent infringement lawsuits from so-called non-practicing entities (NPEs).

The article explores the impact of patent troll legislation on innovations in the pharmaceutical industry in the U.S.

The article reflects on how to protect patents owned by failing startup companies having value more than one billion U.S. dollars. He mentions about investor groups and enterprising lawyers who buy such patents with the aim to acquire new assets and public companies to may purchase such patents with the aims of monetizing them. He further suggests technology companies to acquire patents from failing companies so as to protect patents from patent trolls.

The article discusses the significant growth of recognizing intellectual property (IP) rights in the gas and oil industry leading to the rise of patent litigation in the sector. Topics covered include different rules of various patent systems across the globe, the trade off in a patent system and protection of trade secret by technology innovators. Also mentioned are inventions exclusivity and patent trolls or non-practicing entities (NPEs) targeting patent rights of gas and oil technologies.

The article explains the defensive or offensive use of inter partes reviews (IPRs) by companies for gaining freedom-to-operate, fight patent trolls and face aggressive competitors. Topics include invalidation of patent by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the blocking patent of competitors and the federal court declaratory judgment (DJ) action. Also cited are the 60-page limit in IPR petition, being on the defence afer filing a patent infringement case and IPR reexamination rules.

The author discusses the infringement of digital rights management (DRM) patents case filed by Smartflash against Apple. He agrees that the technology sector can gain various lessons from the ruling of the jury in the Smartflash case. Also discussed are non-practicing entities (NPEs) or patent assertion companies such as Smartflash, Apple with 10,0356 patents issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and possibilities for the U.S. Congress to reform the patent system and rule NPEs out.

The author discusses the increasing number of medical device patents that are being acquired by non-practicing entities (NPEs) also called patent aggregators or patent trolls. He agrees that patent aggregators buy patents for the sole purpose of filing lawsuits on copyright infringement for monetising their patent portfolio. Also discussed are NPE litigations focused on computer software developers, e-commerce companies and infringement of medical device patents.

The article focuses on the legislative reforms Form 18 for dealing with the patent troll or nonpracticing entities problems in the U.S. Topics discussed include increase in number of patent infringement lawsuits in the U.S., the decision held by the U.S. Supreme Court in the cases Ashcroft v. Iqbal and Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, and the Form 18 that allows patent owner to file patent infringement suits against a number of defendants.

The author comments on how U.S. courts address problem related to patent trolls (non-practising entities (NPEs)) Topics discussed include a study by PricewaterhouseCoopers which found NPEs accounting 67 percent of U.S. patent infringement lawsuits, five executive actions issued by U.S. President Barack Obama, directing the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to increase patent system's transparency, and the decision held in the U.S. Supreme Court case Alice Corp Pty Ltd v. CLS Bank Intl.

The article focuses on how U.S. patent industry should oppose patent troll (nonpracticing entities) demand letters. It mentions that patent troll demand letters cost millions of dollars to small businesses and wreck confidence of public in the patent system. It also offers information on the "Stand Up to the Demand" campaign started by patent licensing company Conversant to help small businesses and presents views of David Kappos of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on the same.

The article offers tips that help protect business from non-practising entities (NPEs), particularly patent trolls. It mentions that patent trolls produce no products, have no significant assets, and acquire technology but do not invent it commercially. It suggests having a defensive patent strategy, getting details about the claim when targeted by a patent troll, and gaining technical knowledge for understanding the scope of patented technology.

The article focuses on debates in European Union (EU) and the U.S. over patent enforcement and rise of nonpracticing entities (NPEs), particularly patent trolls. It offers information on Peter Detkin of Intellectual Ventures, who gave a meaning to the term patent trolls. It mentions that the term NPE encompasses patent owners who want to develop and transfer technology. It also highlights the universities that top the lists of NPE such as University of New Mexico.

The article focuses on the European Union (EU)-wide Unified Patent Court's (UPC) rules for non-practicing entities (patent trolls). Topics discussed include patent troll litigations in the U.S., U.S. Supreme court's decision in case eBay v. MercExchange, and establishment of the inter partes review (IPR) system in 2012 which permits validity to Challange the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). It highlights the U.S. International Trade Commission's (ITC) plans to enforce patent rights.

The author reflects on the impact of the Goodlatte bill passed by the U.S. Congress concerning the Congressman Goodlatte's Innovation Act related to patents that would treat all plaintiffs as patent trolls in the U.S. Topics discussed include involvement of small businesses under the provisions of the bill such as individual inventors, pharmaceutical companies and universities, pleading requirements of the bill, and the bill's impact on the cost of patent infringement litigation.

The article discusses growth in the number of legal cases which involves violation of legal rights which is conferred to the patentee. It highlights that the information technology companies invest large amount of money for protection of their patents. It also discusses the role of non-practicing entities in licensing of patents.

In this article, the author questions the opening of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) is a proposed patent court common to several member states of the European Union which will hear cases related to patent infringement and validation of patents. It discusses the advantages which nonpracticing legal entities which include patent owners will derive from the UPC.

The article suggests various ways for patent lawyers to defend the cases associated with patent rights that involve the risk of patent troll. It suggests ways to dismiss the complaint made by patent owners against insufficient patent infringement allegations. Also discussed are provisions granted under the 35 section of the U.S. penal code.

The article offers information on the Saving High-Tech Innovators from Egregious Legal Disputes (SHIELD) Act of 2013 passed by U.S. Representative for Oregon's 4th congressional district Peter DeFazio and Jason Chaffetz, U.S. Representative for Utah's 3rd congressional district. It highlights the act has been passed to force patent trolls for taking financial responsibility and also to protect interests of small business enterprises.

The article focuses on the aspects of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), a patent law reform in the U.S. It states that the provision has led to an increase in multiparty actions. It states that non-practicing entities (NPEs) usually sue the same number of defendants prior to filing separate suits for each of the defendants. It says that the search for solutions for the issue related to the joinder provisions are underway.

The article focuses on the changes in the U.S. patent law, proposed by the U.S. Innovation Act of 2015. It states that the various changes proposed to the U.S. patent law include increased transparency in patent ownership, deterring the patent troll's in halfbaked infringement claims and postponement of fact discovery. It discusses that in patent litigation, the first step to be initiated is fact discovery and mentions the approach adopted by the U.S. courts in handling patent troll cases.

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various reports within the issue on topics including non-practicing entities and patent litigations.

The article reflects on the impact of the Saving High-Tech Innovators from Egregious Legal Disputes (SHIELD) Act which has been reintroduced by U.S. Congressmen Peter DeFazio and Jason Chaffetz. It states that the SHIELD Act protects the intellectual property right of the brand owners. It states that the cat can solve the problem related to patent troll, a term used for a person or a company that enforces infringement case against alleged infringers.