The Inn’s February meeting dove into the world of the United States International Trade Commission with a panel discussion. The panel focused on considerations, strategy, and other issues related to intellectual property litigation before the ITC, as well as in federal district court. Jim Coughlan, a partner at Perkins Coie presented a primary on litigation before the ITC, and joined the panel along with Chief Administrative Law Judge Clark S. Cheney and the Honorable James L. Robart of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. Jonathan McFarland, Director of Litigation, Enforcement, and Product Clearance at Nintendo of America Inc. moderated the panel. The Inn greatly appreciates the valuable insight offered by Judge Robart and Chief ALJ Cheney on the similarities and differences of litigating before the ITC and in district court.
Archive for Patent Litigation
January 2023 Meeting – Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Intellectual Property Litigation and Practice
The Seattle IP Inn kicked off the new year with an important presentation on diversity, inclusion, and equity issues in the legal profession. Mark Walters, a partner at Lowe Graham Jones gave a presentation on efforts to eradicate racism and prejudice in our legal system, including Batson challenges, General Rule 37 in Washington, and Henderson v. Thompson (WA Supreme Court Case No. 97672-4, Oct. 20, 2022). Kate Geyer, an associate at Kilpatrick Townsend, also gave a presentation on gender, equality, diversity, and intellectual property (shown below). The night wrapped up with a panel discussion with U.S. District Court Magistrate Judge Michelle Peterson of the Western District of Washington and Ms. Teri Nguyen, Visiting Professor at Seattle University School of Law. The panel was moderated by Suellen Siqueira-Fisher, Legal Counsel at RealNetworks, who facilitated a captivating discussion on diversity, inclusion, and equity in the practice of intellectual property law, including past and proposed efforts to reduce prejudice in our profession.
On October 18, 2022, the Michel IP Inn of Court and Seattle IP Inn of Court hosted a joint Inn meeting. The meeting focused on best practices for claim construction oral advocacy, and gave junior members a unique opportunity: a simulated appellate oral argument before the Hon. Richard Linn, Circuit Judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the Hon. James Robart, District Judge for the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington.
The meeting used an advanced Zoom setup, provided graciously by TSG Reporting, allowing participants to connect from Seattle, Los Angeles, and Washington DC. Jerry Riedinger (co-founder of the Seattle IP Inn of Court) opened with an excellent presentation on claim construction argument best practices and pointers. Judge Linn and Judge Robart then presided over a moot appellate argument in the fictitious matter of Texas Patentee v. Big Tech Mobile Device Co. Two junior attorneys from each Inn argued challenging claim construction issues (patterned after difficult real world issues), with the Michel IP Inn representing Texas Patentee and the Seattle IP Inn of Court representing Big Tech Mobile Device Co. The meeting was highly successful, with more than 75 members attending. The Inns wish to thank all involved for their time and effort, including the Hon. Michael R. Wilner, Magistrate Judge for the United States District Court for the Central District of California, who could not participate due to a last minute conflict.
This Month, the presenting group provided mock direct and cross-examinations, various tips and tricks, and the Inn heard from a special guest lecturer, Hon. Matthew Williams, King County Superior Court; offering his insights into online trials.
The Seattle IP Inn of Court held its October 22, 2020, meeting in a virtual mixer format. The meeting included a overview presentation of recent developments in IP law. A section on trademarks covered willful infringement, the ability to protect “generic.com” terms, and the need for likelihood of confusion in counterfeit cases. A section on copyrights addresses the outstanding issues in the Google v Oracle case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. This included the copyright eligibility of application programming interfaces and associated fair use defenses. A section on patents covered recent developments in discretionary denials at the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB). The patent segment also contained a discussion of the Arthrex case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve whether PTAB judges are principal officers, and, if so, whether the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals cured any defects in the statutory scheme creating these judgeships.
Thank you to all the participants!
The Seattle IP Inn of Court held a virtual mixer for its May 19, 2020 meeting. The attendees began the meeting by briefly discussing Inn matters. The discussion moved on to practicing law remotely, taking depositions through Zoom, conducting trials through Zoom, and keeping kids occupied during the summer while parents continue to work from home. The conversation was informative, but also casual. Thank you to all the participants!
Patent Law: Current state of Section 101 law and efforts to seek clarity from CAFC and SCOTUS – January 16, 2020
On a snowy evening in Seattle, Group 3 presented Patent Law: Current state of Section 101 law and efforts to seek clarity from CAFC and SCOTUS. Thank you for your presentation, Group 3!
The November meeting took place in our usual meeting location at the University of Washington Club on the UW campus. Group 2 presented on Motions in Limine Strategy in IP Cases. Thank you for your presentation, Group 2!
Group 3 gave a panel presentation entitled “A Review of Key Patent Law Developments in 2018.” Thank you for your presentation, Group 3!
Group 2 reenacted portions of the U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in the WesternGeco LLC, v. Ion Geophysical Corporation, No. 16-1011, 585 U.S. ___ (2018) patent case. Oral argument occurred on April 16, 2018 and the Court issued its decision on June 22, 2018. Thank you to Group 2 for a lively and entertaining presentation!