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.
Partner Rob Jacob unveils plans to offer a beginning-to-end trademark service, how to make prosecution profitable, and why IP ‘buy-in’ from the CEO stands the firm in good stead
Gillian Tan of That.Legal discusses a recent decision by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore and what it reveals about the evidential burden in bad-faith trademark claims
Attorneys at Di Blasi, Parente & Associados share how the protection of trade secrets strengthens innovation by bringing together legal practice, regulatory developments, and established international references
Jin Ooi, who joins as a partner today, said he is excited to offer a ‘rounded’ IP service as the firm deepens its litigation expertise in the UK and Europe
Eduardo Hallak, Rafaella Oliveira, and Laís Souza of Licks Attorneys explain how the provision operates in practice, highlighting evidential hurdles and best practices for patent applicants