On May 22 this year, the US Supreme Court decided the most eagerly-awaited patent case in many years, Festo v SMC. The case addresses a key issue for patent holders: what protection is available under the doctrine of equivalents. But was the decision as important as many people have claimed? What effect will it have for patent applicants and litigants in the US? And what impact will it have on the US Patent and Trademark Office, the Federal Circuit and district courts? MIP invited six senior IP practitioners in the US to a round table discussion, held at the Washington DC offices of Finnegan Henderson, to discuss the implications of the Festo decision, as well as other recent patent cases. James Nurton moderated the discussion
Unlock this content.
The content you are trying to view is exclusive to our subscribers.
High-earning businesses place most value on the depth of the external legal teams advising them, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 in-house counsel
In-house lawyers have considerable influence over law firms’ actions, so they must use that power to push their external advisers to adopt sustainable practices