Search for: "Rantanen"
Results 221 - 240
of 460
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jul 2014, 9:55 am
Professor Rantanen and I will see you next week at the Ninth Annual Door County IP Academy: http://marketplace.wisbar.org/Pages/eventDetails.aspx? [read post]
8 Jul 2014, 7:42 am
The Court has often (but not always, as our host Jason Rantanen has pointed out) expressed a preference for a “functional” approach to patent law, however: that is, a preference for standards over hard and fast rules. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 5:28 pm
(Rantanen) [read post]
27 Jun 2014, 12:54 pm
By Jason Rantanen Teva recently filed its merits brief in Teva v. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 2:41 pm
By Jason Rantanen While many eyes will be on the Supreme Court on Monday when it releases its decision in Hobby Lobby v. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 2:13 pm
By Jason Rantanen Today, the patent office issued new instructions (download: PTO Alice Instructions) for patent examiners to follow when examining claims for compliance with Section 101. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 9:24 am
By Jason Rantanen American Broadcasting Cos., Inc. v. [read post]
22 Jun 2014, 8:53 pm
By Jason Rantanen SCOTUSblog is publishing a series of essays on Alice v. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 7:43 am
By Jason Rantanen Alice Corporation Pty. [read post]
18 Jun 2014, 7:53 am
Prof Rantanen also points out that the mark may still be protectable under Section 43(a) as an unregistered mark, but that the law is unsettled. [read post]
12 Jun 2014, 10:41 am
By Jason Rantanen The past two weeks have seen a substantial number of nonobviousness opinions emerge from the Federal Circuit. [read post]
11 Jun 2014, 1:01 pm
By Jason Rantanen I’m currently spending much of my time attempting to untangle the mess that is the law around Section 284 enhanced damages (i.e.: willful infringement) and Section 285 attorney fee awards (i.e.: exceptional case determinations). [read post]
4 Jun 2014, 4:08 am
See Jason Rantanen, Commil v. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 1:01 pm
By Jason Rantanen As I read yesterday’s two Supreme Court opinions, I was struck by the sense that even as it grants certiorari on an extraordinary number of patent cases, the Court’s actual substantive engagement with patent law seems to be flagging. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 11:11 am
By Jason Rantanen Yesterday, following the Supreme Court’s unanimous reversal of the Federal Circuit in Nautilus and Limelight, Vera Ranieri of the Electronic Frontier Foundation observed that: These rulings mean that the Federal Circuit has been unanimously overruled in every single patent case heard by the Supreme Court this term. [read post]
29 May 2014, 2:03 pm
By Jason Rantanen K/S HIMPP v. [read post]
26 May 2014, 12:00 pm
By Jason Rantanen Earlier this month, I posed a question relating to the patent eligibility of the following claim: A method for guiding the selection of a therapeutic treatment regimen for a patient with a known disease or medical condition, said method comprising: (a) providing patient information to a computing device comprising: a first knowledge base comprising a plurality of different therapeutic treatment regimens for said disease or medical condition; a second knowledge… [read post]
5 May 2014, 8:52 am
’ [See Rantanen, Failing the Objectively Baseless Standard]. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 9:09 am
By Jason Rantanen and Joshua Haugo* During the oral argument in Octane Fitness, Justice Alito asked an interesting question about the frequency at which district court judges hear patent cases. [read post]
17 Jan 2014, 10:46 am
By Jason Rantanen As I mentioned a few weeks ago, next week The Sedona Conference will be presenting a major webinar entitled Patent Litigation Best Practices: A Matter for Congress or for Bench and Bar? [read post]
