Willful patent infringement can result in enhanced, and in some case treble, damages but not in every instance. Because the standard for finding willful infringement has traditionally been lower than that for enhancing damages, a finding of willful infringement does not guarantee an award of enhanced damages.  However, a 2019 Federal Circuit opinion caused confusion, suggesting the standards were essentially the same.  SRI Int’l, Inc.  v. Cisco Sys., Inc. (“SRI II”) 930 F.3d 1295 (Fed. Cir. 2019).  In SRI Int’l, Inc.  v. Cisco Sys., Inc. (“SRI III”) (Fed. Cir. 2021), the Federal Circuit acknowledged the confusion and clarified these standards. Continue Reading Federal Circuit Clarifies Standards for Willful Patent Infringement and Enhanced Damages

This week on the Briefing by the IP Law Blog, Scott Hervey and Josh Escovedo discuss a dispute between rapper, Ice Cube and Robinhood over the trading app’s use of Ice Cube’s image in a newsletter. Continue Reading The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Court Melts Ice Cube’s Trademark Lawsuit against Robinhood + Update

In a recent case, Bell v. Wilmott Storage Services, LLC, decided September 9, 2021, the Ninth Circuit clarified the role that the de minimis concept plays in copyright infringement cases.  In essence, the Ninth Circuit explained that de minimis goes to the amount of copying of a copyrighted work as opposed to any de minimis use or display of any such a work. Continue Reading The De Minimis Concept in Copyright Cases – The Ninth Circuit Says What it is and What it Isn’t

This week on the Briefing by the IP Law Blog, Scott Hervey and Josh Escovedo discuss the naming rights agreement between the Los Angeles Clippers and Intuit whereby the Clippers agreed to name their new $1.8 billion arena in Inglewood, California, the Intuit Dome.

Continue Reading The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Naming Rights for LA Clippers Dome: FinTech Steps Intuit

There are many requirements for obtaining a patent.  One of those is the written description requirement.  Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §112(a), the patent must describe the invention in writing.  If the written description requirement is not met, the patent won’t be granted.  If the patent has already been issued, it can be invalidated for failure to satisfy the written description requirement.  Recently, in Juno Therapeutics, Inc. v. Kite Pharma, Inc., 2021 U.S. App. LexIs 25706 (Fed. Cir. 2021), a damage award of $1.2 billion for patent infringement was reversed for just this reason. Continue Reading Written Description Remains Critical to Patents