Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Patent Law In The Service Of Innovation: The Danger Of "Patent Trolls", Marketa Trimble
Patent Law In The Service Of Innovation: The Danger Of "Patent Trolls", Marketa Trimble
Boyd Briefs / Road Scholars
UNLV's Academic Achievement Gala is a campus-wide event that celebrates the scholarly and creative accomplishments of the university's faculty over the academic year. Prof. Trimble was chosen to have her empirical research on patent litigation showcased at 2014's Academic Achievement Gala. This poster, which was on display at the gala, provides an overview of Prof. Trimble's research on patent trolls.
Foreigners In U.S. Patent Litigation: An Empirical Study Of Patent Cases Filed In Nine U.S. Federal District Courts In 2004, 2009, And 2012 (Presentation), Marketa Trimble
Boyd Briefs / Road Scholars
Professor Marketa Trimble presented these materials at PatCon 4, a conference hosted by the University of San Diego School of Law. Professor Trimble discussed the results of her empirical study of patent litigation involving foreign parties.
The Standard For Awarding Attorney Fees Under 35 U.S.C. Section 285 To Prevailing Parties In Patent Litigation - Octane Fitness, Llc V. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. And Highmark, Inc. V. Allcare Health Management Systems, Dennis D. Crouch, Jafon Fearson
The Standard For Awarding Attorney Fees Under 35 U.S.C. Section 285 To Prevailing Parties In Patent Litigation - Octane Fitness, Llc V. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. And Highmark, Inc. V. Allcare Health Management Systems, Dennis D. Crouch, Jafon Fearson
Faculty Publications
The Supreme Court granted certiorari in two patent infringement cases that both concern shifting of attorney fees under the “exceptional case” standard of 35 U.S.C. § 285. The Federal Circuit has traditionally been resistant to fee shifting awards—especially in cases where an accused infringer is the prevailing party. In Octane Fitness, petitioner asks the Court to lower the standard for proving an exceptional case. In Highmark, petitioner asks for deference to lower court exceptional case findings.
Foreigners In U.S. Patent Litigation: An Empirical Study Of Patent Cases Filed In Nine U.S. Federal District Courts In 2004, 2009, And 2012, Marketa Trimble
Foreigners In U.S. Patent Litigation: An Empirical Study Of Patent Cases Filed In Nine U.S. Federal District Courts In 2004, 2009, And 2012, Marketa Trimble
Scholarly Works
One of the greatest challenges facing patent holders is the enforcement of their rights against foreign (non-U.S.) infringers. Jurisdictional rules can prevent patent holders from filing patent infringement suits where they have the greatest likelihood of success in enforcement, such as where the infringer is located, has his seat, or holds his assets; instead, patent holders must file lawsuits in the country where the infringed patent was issued. But filing a patent lawsuit in a U.S. court against a non-U.S. infringer may be subject to various difficulties associated with the fact that U.S. substantive patent law (particularly as regards its …
Patent Law Federalism, Paul Gugliuzza
Patent Law Federalism, Paul Gugliuzza
Faculty Scholarship
Most lawsuits arising under federal law can be filed in either state or federal court. Patent suits, however, may be filed only in federal court. Why do patent cases receive exceptional treatment? The usual answer is that federal courts, unlike state courts, provide uniformity and expertise in patent matters. This Article analyzes whether exclusive jurisdiction actually serves those policy aims and concludes that the uniformity-expertise rationale is overstated. If exclusive federal patent jurisdiction is to be justified, attention must also be given to pragmatic considerations, such as the respective quality of state and federal trial courts, the courts’ ability to …