Blog Posts

Sovereign Immunity, Upper Skagit, and Patents

Earlier this week, the Supreme Court released their decision in Upper Skagit Indian Tribe v. Lundgren.  The opinion effectively held that the simple fact of in rem jurisdiction does not always bar claims of tribal sovereign immunity. In rem jurisdiction is one argument that might bar the new practice of renting tribal sovereign immunity to…

Smartphones, Diapers, and Design Patents

Apple v. Samsung is obviously about high tech smartphones.  Other recent design patent cases have focused on high tech products as well—both the Nikola v. Tesla case Patent Progress covered recently and the Microsoft v. Corel case that Prof. Sarah Burstein described over on Patently-O deal with high tech products. But the basic issue with…

Did You Buy Your Car Just Because Of The Cup Holder?

Opening arguments in Apple v. Samsung started this morning.  While round six of the long-running case deals with smartphone patents, the potential impacts range much further.  As I noted in my post yesterday, a rule of design patent damages that allows patentees to receive the total profits on the entire product even though the design…

Apple v. Samsung, Round Six

A district court trial.  A retrial, after part of the verdict was vacated.  An appeal to the Federal Circuit.  A Supreme Court opinion with a remand to the Federal Circuit.  A remand from the Federal Circuit back to the district court.  Seven years after Apple originally filed suit against Samsung, we’re right back in Judge…

PTAB Will Continue To Double-Check Its Work—All Of It

Today, the Supreme Court issued two opinions in cases focused on the inter partes review (IPR) procedure.  First, in Oil States v. Greene’s Energy Group, the Court upheld the constitutionality of IPR by a 7-2 vote.  Second, in a more narrowly divided 5-4 decision in SAS v. Matal, the Court decided that the PTAB’s practice…