PPT-Enhanced Damages for Patent Infringement: Halo v. Pulse

Presented by David Neal 2016 Workman Nydegger Outline Halo v Pulse Is the Seagate Test Consistent with 35 US Code 284 Overview History of Enhanced Damages Underwater Devices v MorrisonKnudsen and Opinions of Counsel. Dimitrios T. Drivas. April 8, 2015. Fordham IP . Institute: 2C. . U.S. Patent Law. U.S. . Supreme Court. 35 U.S.C. § 285, Exceptional Case Standard for Award – . Octane Fitness v. ICON . Octane Fitness LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, . for Demand Letters. HEA. . 1102- Bad . Faith Assertions of . Patent . Infringement. Indiana- Patent Troll Statute- Demand Letters . HEA. 1102- “Bad Faith Assertions of Patent Infringement”. Effective: July 1, 2015 . Intellectual Property Litigation for the Non-Litigator. June 2013. Table of Contents. 1. Overview ..................................................................................................................... Nisha Mody. nmody@oskr.com. Who Proffers Damages. Usually Plaintiffs hire one expert and Defendants hire another. Both are independent. Experts usually are . Economists . Financial Experts (CFA designation) . Vandana. . Mamidanna. Patent is a . sovereign right . to . exclude others from:. making, using or selling the patented invention in the patented country.. offering the patented invention for sale. importing the patented invention into the patented country.. 2015-2016 Term. 1. . Brett . Bachtell, . Qualcomm . Incorporated . Debra . Condino. , Allergan . plc. Craig . Countryman, Fish . & Richardson P.C.. Ted . Dane, . Munger. . Tolles. & Olson LLP . Erik . Puknys. , . Partner. ,.  . Finnegan. Karen Robinson. , Director of Litigation. , Adobe. Kim Schenk. , . Principal. , Charles River Associates. Patrick Weston, . Senior Litigation Counsel, . Intellectual Property Litigation for the Non-Litigator. June 2013. Table of Contents. 1. Overview ..................................................................................................................... Damages. Where Are We? Where Are. We Going? Are We There Yet. ?. Judge Cathy Bencivengo (S.D. Cal.). Judge Cathy Bissoon (W.D. Pa.). Judge Christopher Burke (D. Del.) . Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III (E.D. Tex.). for . AIPLA Corporate Practice Committee. Susan Kirsch, Partner. October 2015 . A Comparison of the UK, German, and French Patent Courts. United Kingdom. The European Courts - UK court structure. Court of Appeal. Halo v. Pulse. June 15, 2017. MNACCA In-House Counsel Conference. Jason Zucchi. Principal. Fish & Richardson P.C.. Topics for Discussion. INSIGHTS. Litigation Webinar Series. 2. The new . Halo . April 18, 2018. Justin A. Hendrix. , . Partner. , . Finnegan. Doug . Lumish. , . Partner. , Latham & Watkins LLP. Kim . Schenk. , . Principal. , Charles River Associates. Darin Snyder. , . Partner. December 14, 2017. Karen Boyd, Turner Boyd. Daralyn Durie, Durie Tangri. Leah Waterland, Cisco Systems, Inc.. Moderator: Gregory Pinsonneault, . LitiNomics. . Apportionment. 2. Why apportion?. What is the correct royalty base?. SCOTUS – October 2014 Term. Teva. Pharmaceuticals v. Sandoz. 574 U.S. ___ (2015). Kimble . et al. . v. Marvel Entertainment. 576 U.S. ___ (2015). Commil. v. Cisco. 575 U.S. ___ (2015). Teva. Pharmaceuticals v. Sandoz.