Posts Tagged: Octane Fitness v. ICON Health Fitness


Examining Octane Fitness Five Years On

Five years ago today, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Octane Fitness LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., empowering district courts to award attorneys’ fees in …

How U.S. Patent and Litigation Abuse Can Deter Small Inventors: The Story of Cheekd

In one more example of ways the U.S. patent system can be stacked against the small inventor, we have the story of Lori Cheek, who more …
By Eileen McDermott
6 months ago 10

Working Out with Octane Fitness: Four Years Later

On February 2, 2018, in Sophos Inc. v. RPost Holding, Inc., Judge Denise Casper became the latest judge to declare a case “exceptional” under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and award …

Octane Standard for Attorney’s Fees Applies to Lanham Act and Patent Act Cases

In mag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., Romag sued Fossil for patent and trademark infringement and a violation of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (“CUTPA”) after …

Federal Circuit Reverses Grant of Attorney Fees; Case Not Exceptional Under 35 U.S.C. § 285

In the Federal Circuit case of Checkpoint Systems v. All-Tag Sec, The Federal Circuit held that the district court erred in finding this case exceptional under 35 U.…

Federal Circuit Declines to Award Attorney Fees in Inventorship Dispute

The Federal Circuit heard the case on Univ. of Utah v. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Zur Foerderung der Wissenschaften e.V. At issue is whether the district court abused its …

CAFC Affirms Attorney Fees Awarded Under ‘Holistic and Equitable’ Evaluation of Case

In conclusion, the Court held the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that, under the totality of circumstances, this was an exceptional case, and …

Discretion Beats Out Bright Line Test for Enhanced Patent Damages: Halo v. Pulse

In last week’s Halo Elecs. v. Pulse Elecs. decision, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Federal Circuit’s Seagate standard for awarding enhanced damages in patent …
By Kara R. Fussner
3 years ago 2

The Supreme Court should follow their own Halo advice in §101 patent eligibility decisions

Essentially, the Supreme Court told the Federal Circuit that they needed remedial reading lessons. The statute is clear: “may” means district courts have discretion. The Supreme Court …
By Gene Quinn
3 years ago 16

Has the Supreme Court Breathed New Life into Patent Trolls in Halo and Stryker?

The chance of a court tripling damages for patent infringement has significantly increased. The Supreme Court, Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., et al. and Stryker …
By Chase Means
3 years ago 12

SCOTUS should adopt flexible, case-specific approach to attorneys’ fee awards in copyright cases

The IPO recently filed an amicus brief at the Supreme Court in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. supporting a flexible approach to awarding attorneys’ fees. Oral …
By Gunnar Gundersen
4 years ago 0

What the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia means for SCOTUS patent jurisprudence

While Justice Scalia served on the Supreme Court for nearly three decades, his contributions to the area of intellectual property law were quite limited. Scalia did famously …
By Gene Quinn
4 years ago 17

2015 Supreme Court Term: Cert Petitions to Watch

Since the start of the Supreme Court’s term in October, the Court has already agreed to hear two patent cases, Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, …

History Repeating Itself at the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently decided to review a pair of cases that challenge the Federal Circuit’s willful infringement test. The two cases, Halo Electronics, Inc. v. …
By Alex M. Grabowski
4 years ago 1

Patent Fee Shifting Stops Not Only Patent Trolls But Industry Bullies Too

What may be less well known is that Octane was not itself a “patent troll” case. Rather, Octane involved another kind of abusive patent litigation; namely, a …