George Mason University School of Law PATENT LITIGATION AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION. Spring Tuesdays 8:00-9:50 P.M. Classroom 329 SYLLABUS

Similar documents
George Mason University School of Law PATENT LITIGATION AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION. Spring Tuesdays 8:00-9:50 P.M. SYLLABUS INSTRUCTORS

Case 2:16-cv JAK-AS Document 29 Filed 10/15/16 Page 1 of 14 Page ID #:190

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS [MARSHALL / TYLER / TEXARKANA] DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) DOCKET CONTROL ORDER STEP ACTION RULE DATE DUE 1

PTAB Trial Proceedings and Parallel Litigation: Impact, Strategy & Consequences

These materials are public information and have been prepared solely for educational and entertainment purposes to contribute to the understanding of

Courthouse News Service

The New Post-AIA World

IP Litigation in USA Costs, Duration and Enforceability

Cislo & Thomas LLP Litigation Cost Control (LCC ) Stages of Litigation and Expected Fees and Costs

University of Houston Law Center PRE-TRIAL LITIGATION SYLLABUS. Spring 2015 Thursday 6:00-9:00 p.m. Room 111 TU2 Breakout Rooms TBA

Paper Entered: October 24, 2014 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Paper Date Entered: November 2, 2015 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

Post-Grant Proceedings in the USPTO

New Post Grant Proceedings: Basics by

FORM 4. RULE 26(f) REPORT (PATENT CASES) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

CASE 0:16-cv PJS-FLN Document 18 Filed 03/07/16 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Paper Entered: July 29, 2013 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Paper Entered: July 29, 2013 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Using the ITC as a Trademark Enforcement Tool

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL JURY TRIALS BEFORE DISTRICT JUDGE JON S.

WIPO Conference on IP Dispute Resolution in Life Sciences 22 May 2015 Anthony C. Tridico, Ph.D.

Case 1:15-cv LTS Document 29 Filed 03/11/16 Page 1 of 7

The Tundra Docket: Western District Of Wisconsin

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DRIVES, STACKED ELECTRONICS COMPONENTS, AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME

Case 1:10-cv GBL-TRJ Document 1 Filed 04/02/10 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Overview of Trial Proceedings Role of Judge/Jury, Markman Hearings, and Introduction to Evidence

CHAPTER 1. DISCLOSING EXPERT WITNESSES UNDER THE FEDERAL RULES: AN OVERVIEW

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PATENT CASE SCHEDULE. Answer or Other Response to Complaint 5 weeks

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No HON. GERSHWIN A. DRAIN

Pretrial Litigation Guidelines Fall Wednesday Class 6-9 p.m. Rm TBA

Intellectual Property& Technology Law Journal

Legal Assistant Utilization May Optimize Client Services in Litigation Practice

Paper 14 Tel: Entered: July 17, 2017 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

New Local Patent Rules In Northern District Of Ill.

Case 2:05-cv TJW Document 211 Filed 12/21/2005 Page 1 of 11

Inequitable Conduct Judicial Developments

Initial Pre-hearing Arbitration Scheduling Order. Parties

Licensing & Management of IP Assets. Covenant Not to Sue

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Paralegal Section MCLE Meeting DCBA Bar Center Date: November 8, 2017

CIVIL PRETRIAL PRACTICE SPRING 2006 SYLLABUS

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. EDMUND OPTICS, INC., Petitioner, SEMROCK, INC., Patent Owner.

716 West Ave Austin, TX USA

Nebraska Civil Practice & Procedure Manual

WIPO Conference on IP Dispute Resolution in Life Sciences 2016 Amanda K. Murphy, Ph.D.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Paper Date: June 5, 2014 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Presentation to SDIPLA

Case 1:10-cv PAB-KLM Document 116 Filed 04/29/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

What is Post Grant Review?

LEG 283T.01: Trial Preparation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NOS.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit KARLIN TECHNOLOGY INC. and SOFAMOR DANEK GROUP, INC., Defendants-Appellants,

U.S. District Court Middle District of Florida (Ft. Myers) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:05-cv JES-DNF

Case 1:14-cv GAO Document 1 Filed 05/28/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA IN RE: KATRINA CANAL BREACHES CONSOLIDATED LITIGATION NO.

Post Grant Review. Strategy. Nathan Frederick Director, IP Services

University of Houston Law Center PRE-TRIAL LITIGATION SYLLABUS. Fall 2018 Thursday 6:00-9:00 p.m. Room 111 TU2 Breakout Rooms TBA

Trial Day In Court Out of Court

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF LUZERNE COUNTY

Case 1:13-cv GBL-IDD Document 10-2 Filed 05/16/13 Page 1 of 19 PageID# 312

Civil Litigation Forms Library

Paper: Entered: January 19, 2016 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Presidential Candidate Declaration of Intent

How Bilski Impacts Your Patent Prosecution and Litigation Strategies. MIP Inaugural China-International IP Forum June 30, 2010, Beijing

, ParkerVision, Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated

CLASS ACTION JURY TRIALS

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ) ) ) ) )

Patent Litigation for the Non-Specialist: How it Works and What to Expect

TU TU

Anthony C Tridico, Ph.D.

Patent Litigation for the Non-Specialist: How it Works and What to Expect

U.S. District Court District of Maryland (Greenbelt) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 8:05-cv RWT

Case 1:11-mc RLW Document 4 Filed 06/03/11 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

WYOMING RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR CIRCUIT COURTS

Case 1:14-cv TSC Document 113 Filed 03/31/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

TRIAL ADVOCACY - FALL 2005

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA. vs. Case No: ORDER ESTABLISHING MOTION PRACTICE PROCEDURE

Paper 13 Tel: Entered: March 20, 2014 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER

, ParkerVision, Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated UNOPPOSED MOTION OF PARKERVISION, INC., TO REFORM THE OFFICIAL CAPTION

The Legal Process: The Adversary System and Dispute Resolution

vs. OF TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS DISCOVERY AND DOCKET CONTROL PLAN FOR LEVEL 3 CASE ( PLAN )

Civil Action No.: 9= /0 C/\j /-^

Case 3:10-cv JAP -TJB Document 1 Filed 08/16/10 Page 1 of 13 PageID: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

First-Inventor-to-File

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. Before the Honorable E. James Gildea Administrative Law Judge

STANDING ORDER FOR CALENDAR Y * Room 2101

Paper Entered: August 13, 2014 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Northern Ill.'s New Local Patent Rules

Insight from Carlton Fields

Interrogatories Are Written Questions For Which Written Answers Are Prepared And Signed Under Oath

being preempted by the court's criminal calendar.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. TOYO TIRE U.S.A. CORP., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Case No: 14 C 206 )

Case 1:12-cv GBL-JFA Document 67 Filed 01/02/13 Page 1 of 6 PageID# 748

Educational Briefing On Interference Proceedings Relating To CRISPR/Cas9 Genome Editing Technology Patents. August 28, 2018

Transcription:

George Mason University School of Law PATENT LITIGATION AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION Spring 2014 Tuesdays 8:00-9:50 P.M. Classroom 329 SYLLABUS INSTRUCTORS Robert F. Shaffer Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP 901 New York Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 408-4375 robert.shaffer@finnegan.com Robert L. Burns Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP 11955 Freedom Drive Reston, VA 20190 (571) 203-2736 robert.burns@finnegan.com John M. Williamson Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP 901 New York Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 408-4282 john.williamson@finnegan.com William B. Raich Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP 901 New York Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 408-4210 william.raich@finnegan.com Luke McCammon Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP 901 New York Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 408-4273 luke.mccammon@finnegan.com 1

PATENT LITIGATION Spring 2014 Course Materials (1) Case File (2) Selected statutes, rules, cases, and articles that may be assigned for reading during the semester. 2

PATENT LITIGATION (SPRING 2014) CLASS DATE STUDENT PRESENTATION FILINGS 1 JAN 14 None 2 JAN 21 Draft Complaint Draft Initial Disclosures DJ Plaintiff AMC (MASON) to Serve Complaint Sun., Jan. 26 Present Web Site Overview Present Draft Position Paper 3 JAN 28 Present Revised Draft Position Paper Draft Discovery Requests DJ Defendant GGI (SUFFOLK) to Serve Answer and Counterclaims Sun., Feb. 2 Parties to Serve Initial Disclosures Sun., Feb. 2 Parties to Serve Discovery Requests Sun., Feb. 2 3

CLASS DATE STUDENT PRESENTATION 4 FEB 4 Draft Discovery Responses FILINGS Plaintiff to Serve Reply to Counterclaim Wed., Feb. 5 Parties to Serve Discovery Responses Sun., Feb. 9 5 FEB 11 Draft Claim Chart (Invalidity) Review Discovery Responses Parties to Serve Infringement and Invalidity Disclosures (Plaintiff re Infringement; Defendant re Invalidity) Sun., Feb. 16 Parties to Exchange Proposed Claim Terms To Be Construed Sun., Feb. 16 6 FEB 18 Draft of Markman Brief Draft Motions to Compel Parties to Meet and Confer Final Claim Terms to be Construed Fri., Feb. 21 by 5 p.m. Parties to Exchange Proposed Constructions Sun., Feb. 23 Serve Motions to Compel Sun., Feb. 23 4

CLASS DATE STUDENT PRESENTATION 7 FEB 25 Continue Draft of Markman Brief Draft Reply Motion to Compel 8 MAR 4 Practice Markman Argument Review of Deposition Preparations FILINGS Parties to Serve Markman Briefs Sun., Mar. 2 Serve Reply to Motion to Compel Sun., Mar. 2 Markman Hearing Thur. Mar. 6 at 9 PM (Finnegan offices at 901 New York Ave., NW, Washington DC 20001) MAR 11 SPRING BREAK NO CLASS 9 MAR 18 Draft Motion for Summary Judgment Parties to Complete Two Depositions Each Sun. Mar. 23 Parties to Serve Any Motions for Summary Judgment Sun. Mar. 23 10 MAR 25 Draft Expert Reports (Technical, Legal) Parties to Serve Expert Reports Sun., Mar. 30 5

CLASS DATE STUDENT PRESENTATION 11 APR 1 Draft Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment Draft Trial Brief, Testimony FILINGS Parties to Serve Replies to Any Motions for Summary Judgment Sun., Apr. 6 Parties to Serve Trial Briefs; Parties to Serve Any Motions in Limine Sun., April 6 12 APR 8 Revise Draft Trial Brief, Testimony Draft Motions in Limine Draft Jury Instructions Parties to Serve Trial Briefs; Parties to Serve Any Motions in Limine Sun., April 13 Parties to Serve Proposed Jury Instructions Sun., April 13 13 APR 15 Trial Preparation Draft Demonstrative Exhibits Parties to Serve Witness Lists Wed. Apr. 16 (midnight) Parties to Serve Demonstrative Exhibits Fri. April 18 (noon) Parties to Serve Responses to Any Motions in Limine Fri. April 18 (noon) 6

CLASS DATE STUDENT PRESENTATION FILINGS 14 SAT. APR. 19 (9:00 am - 5:00 pm) TRIAL BOSTON, MA 7

DUE DATES 1. DJ Plaintiff (GMU LAW) to Serve Complaint JAN 26 2. DJ Defendant (SUFFOLK LAW) to Serve Answer and Counterclaims FEB 2 3. Plaintiff to Serve Reply to Counterclaim FEB 5 4. Parties to Serve Initial Disclosures FEB 2 5. Parties to Serve Discovery Requests FEB 2 6. Parties to Serve Discovery Responses FEB 9 7. Parties to Serve Motions to Compel (If Any) FEB 23 8. Parties to Serve Infringement & Invalidity Disclosures (Plaintiff re Infringement; Defendant re Invalidity) FEB 16 9. Parties to Exchange Proposed Claim Terms to be Construed FEB 16 10. Parties to Meet and Confer on Final Claim Terms to be Construed FEB 21 (by 5 pm) 11. Parties to Exchange Proposed Constructions FEB 23 12. Parties to Serve Markman Briefs MAR 2 13. Markman Hearing (video conference) MAR 6 (9:00 pm) 14. Parties to Complete Two (2) Depositions Each MAR 23 15. Parties to Serve Any Motions for Summary Judgment MAR 23 16. Parties to Serve Expert Reports MAR 30 17. Parties to Serve Responses to Any Motions for Summary Judgment APR 6 18. Parties to Serve Trial Briefs (If Requested) APR 6 19. Parties to Serve Any Motions in Limine APR 6 8

20. Parties to Serve Proposed Joint Jury Instructions APR 13 21. Parties to Serve Demonstrative Exhibits APR 18 (noon) 22. Parties to Serve Witness List APR 16 (noon) 23. Parties to Serve Responses to Any Motions in Limine APR 18 (midnight) 24. Motions Hearing APR 19(Boston) 25. Trial APR 19 (Boston) 9

Local Rules 1.0 All service to be made by 10:00 p.m. on date due (unless otherwise noted). 2.0 All service to opposing counsel to be made via email, with copies to robert.shaffer@finnegan.com; john.williamson@finnegan.com and Pswain@Foleyhoag.com. 3.0 Depositions limited to two (2) each side, one hour limit each (taking party to provide transcript in five (5) days). 4.0 Interrogatories limited to five (5) each side, counting subparts. 5.0 No requests for admission permitted. 6.0 No expert depositions permitted. 7.0 Markman hearing by video conference, 30 minutes per side. 8.0 No damages discovery permitted (damages issues bifurcated). 10

Assignments Web Master Lead Counsel Plaintiff (x3) Position Paper AMC Witness #1 AMC Witness #2 DJ Complaint Dispute Resolution Letter to Client Initial Disclosures Discovery Requests, Responses, and Motions to Compel Markman Proposed Claim Terms and Constructions Claim Chart (invalidity) Take Deposition 1 Take Deposition 2 Defend Deposition 1 Defend Deposition 2 Plaintiff Witness 2 Technical Expert Patent Expert A B C D E F G H I J K, L M N O P Q R S T U Summary Judgment Brief 11 V

Demonstrative Exhibits Motions in Limine Jury Instructions W X Y 12