Visit our website
New America Cypbersecurity Initiative
New America Cypbersecurity Initiative
MIT Technology Review
MIT Technology Review
io9
io9
Techdirt
Techdirt
Knowledge@Wharton
Knowledge@Wharton
Bioscience Technology
Bioscience Technology
redOrbit
redOrbit
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
Popular Science Blog
Popular Science Blog
Pew Research Center
Pew Research Center
Genomics Law Report
Genomics Law Report
Science 2.0
Science 2.0
The Guardian Headquarters
The Guardian Headquarters
Genetic Literacy Project
Genetic Literacy Project
Disclaimer

Statements posted on this blog represent the views of individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Center for Law Science & Innovation (which does not take positions on policy issues) or of the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law or Arizona State University.

Legal Fees: “Objectively Baseless” v. “Objectively Low Likelihood”

The Supreme Court will soon consider whether the current Federal Circuit standard of “objectively baseless” should be broadened in the case of prevailing defendants in patent infringement suits.  In this particular case (there are two) the court is being asked to depart from the Federal Circuit standard to allow an award of damages in favor of successful defendants when it is determined that there is an  “objectively low likelihood”  that a non-practicing entity’s (NPE) claim will succeed .  With little risk of a plaintiff getting stuck with a defendant’s legal bill, NPE or “patent troll” suits have been on the rise.  Victorious defendants, however, are fighting back.  Read the story here.