US patent litigation makes a comeback in 2015

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

US patent litigation makes a comeback in 2015

The number of lawsuits filed in district courts is up for both January and February this year. What does this mean for the argument over patent reform?

patent20litigation20chart.jpg

Managing IP’s just-published analysis of US district court patent litigation trends so far this year shows a clear trend: litigation is increasing.

February’s number of new patent cases filed was up 11% on January, which was up 2.5% on December. This continued the trend seen at the end of the 2014, when December lawsuits increased a whopping 32% over November.

It is only a month-on-month analysis that shows an increase. The trend is also up when compared with the same month in the previous year – 11% in February over February 2014, 36% in January and 3% in December.

(See my article US patent litigation surges in February, driven by software cases for a full breakdown of the figures and an analysis of how software cases are increasing at even faster rate – subscription or free trial required).

Three straight months of increasing patent litigation is a contrast to a few months ago when the Supreme Court’s June 2014 Alice decision, as well as the astonishing popularity of Patent Trial and Appeal Board proceedings, had appeared to put a dampener on lawsuit filing.

So what is going on? The frist thing to note is that, just as a few months of patent litigation trending down last year was not definitive proof of a long-term trend, a spike back up is not a sure sign of a lawsuit boom. The levels this year are still below 2013 levels.

But this year’s increase throws up some questions to which there are not yet clear answers to. For example, were plaintiffs merely pausing planned litigation to see how Alice would play out in the district courts? Were they taking time out to work out new litigation strategies that would not be affected by Alice before returning to the fray? Is the increase being driven by companies with a long history of litigation or by new companies?

February throws up some contrasts. It saw the continued return of ArrivalStar, the third-busiest NPE in 2013, following a pause in litigation for most of 2014. The company has filed nine lawsuits so far this year, following six lawsuits in November and December. In contrast, a company called Avioniqs filed 30 cases against airlines on February 6, its first ever patent lawsuits. And just yesterday Qommerce Systems sued 23 websites, alleging infringement of a "Dynamic web storefront technology" patent. It had filed its first ever patent lawsuits on February 17 when it sued 20 other websites.

An analysis from Unified Patents had an interesting tidbit to mull over. As with our analysis, Unified – which protects its members against NPEs – found that patent litigation in February was up, although its figures gave a 9% increase on January’s figures. But it also found: “NPE litigation made up 65% of February 2015 initiated district court cases, compared with 68% in February 2014 and 58% in January 2015.”

The pro-patent and anti-patent lobbies will be sure to argue about what it all means. I have previously argued on this blog that a pause before enacting any further reform would be wise, with litigation falling, the Supreme Court relaxing fee shifting standards under Octane and limiting the scope of patentable subject matter under Alice, and the PTAB shifting the balance of power more towards defendants in litigation and away from patent owners. I stand by that position, but reform supporters are sure to pounce on the recent increase in litigation as proof of the need for legislation.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Brian Paul Gearing brings technical depth, litigation expertise, and experience with Japanese business culture to Pillsbury’s IP practice
News of InterDigital suing Amazon in the US and CMS IndusLaw challenging Indian rules on foreign firms were also among the top talking points
IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
In the sixth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Futures, a network for early-career stage IP professionals
Rachel Cohen has reunited with her former colleagues to strengthen Weil’s IP litigation and strategy work
McKool Smith’s Jennifer Truelove explains how a joint effort between her firm and Irell & Manella secured a win for their client against Samsung
Gift this article