District Court Litigation

Ninth Circuit Holds Rule 45 Subpoena Geographic Limits Apply To Remote Testimony: Is This Doom And Gloom For Trial By Zoom?

In an appellate case of first impression on a novel procedural issue, the Ninth Circuit on July 27 in Kirkland v. USBC, Los Angeles, quashed trial subpoenas purporting to command individuals who resided and worked out-of-state and more than 100 miles from the courthouse to “appear” at a hearing by contemporaneous video transmission.  Addressing an […]

Ninth Circuit Holds Rule 45 Subpoena Geographic Limits Apply To Remote Testimony: Is This Doom And Gloom For Trial By Zoom? Read More »

Intellectual Ventures Prevails In Capital One Antitrust Suit

On Friday, a Maryland federal judge granted summary judgment in favor of Intellectual Ventures on Capital One’s claims that IV’s acquisition and enforcement of patents relating to banking services violated U.S. antitrust law.  In a 53-page memorandum Opinion, Judge Paul W. Grimm found that IV’s conduct in obtaining and enforcing its patents was immune from

Intellectual Ventures Prevails In Capital One Antitrust Suit Read More »

USPTO Suspends Second Ex-Niro IP Attorney For 18 Months

It’s deja vu all over again: a second ex-Niro IP attorney has received an 18-month suspension from practice before the USPTO. Attorney Paul C. Gibbons, one of four attorneys from the now defunct Niro, Haller & Niro who were sanctioned for vexatious litigation arising from the firm’s representation of NPE Intellect Wireless, settled a disciplinary

USPTO Suspends Second Ex-Niro IP Attorney For 18 Months Read More »

USPTO Suspends Former Niro IP Attorney For 18 Months Following Patent Litigation Sanctions

The fallout from the Niro, Haller & Niro law firm’s doomed litigation on behalf of Intellect Wireless continues.  For patent litigator David J. Mahalek, the most junior member of the Niro litigation team, the disciplinary shoe of the USPTO did not just drop–it kicked him in the teeth with an 18-month suspension of his law

USPTO Suspends Former Niro IP Attorney For 18 Months Following Patent Litigation Sanctions Read More »

Epic Ethics Legal Battle By Trademark Company Owner Ends Quietly With Resignation

The three-year ethics saga between Matthew Swyers, owner of The Trademark Company, and the USPTO’s Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED), ended with a whisper, with Mr. Swyers agreeing to resign from practicing before the USPTO.  By entering into what is called an “exclusion on consent” agreement, Mr. Swyers voluntarily gives up the ability to provide U.S. trademark-related legal services for a minimum of five (5) years. 

Epic Ethics Legal Battle By Trademark Company Owner Ends Quietly With Resignation Read More »

CAFC Finds Patent Holder’s Position On Standing “Unreasonable” And “Remarkably Weak,” Affirms Atty Fees Award

On January 25, 2017, the Federal Circuit ruled a district court did not abuse its discretion when it awarded the prevailing party’s attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 based upon the losing party’s conduct with respect to responding to one particular issue in discovery. In National Oilwell Varco, L.P. v. Omron Oilfield & Marine,

CAFC Finds Patent Holder’s Position On Standing “Unreasonable” And “Remarkably Weak,” Affirms Atty Fees Award Read More »

Plaintiff Gets Judicial Scolding: “If This Case Is Not Exceptional, Then There Are None”

It says a lot when the busiest patent judge in the United States calls a patent lawsuit “the clearest example of an exceptional case” he has ever seen. That is precisely what happened earlier this week, when Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas, who personally handles one-quarter of all patent cases filed

Plaintiff Gets Judicial Scolding: “If This Case Is Not Exceptional, Then There Are None” Read More »

IP Firm Tees Up Dismissal Of Subject Matter Conflict, Negligent Patent Prosecution Malpractice Case

A recent patent malpractice action filed in federal court in New York against an IP firm raises once again the issue of subject matter conflicts between concurrent clients in prosecuting patent applications in a similar field of technology.  The issue of subject matter conflicts in concurrent patent representation continues to be an area of significant

IP Firm Tees Up Dismissal Of Subject Matter Conflict, Negligent Patent Prosecution Malpractice Case Read More »

Scroll to Top