Duty to Non-Client

Putting On Your Halo: Patent Litigators’ Ethical Duty To Communicate Change In Willfulness Law

Last week, the Supreme Court issued an opinion that significantly altered the legal landscape for proving willful infringement in patent cases. In Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., the Supreme Court rejected the Federal Circuit’s two-part Seagate test for awarding enhanced damages under 35 USC § 284, finding that both the substantive requirement for “objective recklessness” […]

Putting On Your Halo: Patent Litigators’ Ethical Duty To Communicate Change In Willfulness Law Read More »

IP Law Firm Pushes Back Against Lawsuit Alleging It Fraudulently Procured Confidential Inventions

Intellectual property law firm Kilpatrick Townsend is fighting back against accusations in a recent complaint accusing the firm and its client, Omnicell, Inc., of conspiring to fraudulently obtain confidential information about a third-party’s inventions and then using that information to acquire patents for Omnicell naming only an Omnicell employee as the inventor. MV Circuit Design, Inc. v. Omnicell, Inc., et al., No. 1:14-cv-02028-DAP (Sept. 12, 2014 N.D.

IP Law Firm Pushes Back Against Lawsuit Alleging It Fraudulently Procured Confidential Inventions Read More »

Scroll to Top