Octane and Highmark — Supreme Court lowers standard for awarding attorneys’ fees in patent cases
By Jeremy T Elman and Andrew N Stein
The US Supreme Court has issued two related opinions regarding the appropriate standard for awarding attorneys’ fees in patent litigation: Octane Fitness LLC v Icon Health & Fitness Inc and Highmark Inc v Allcare Health Management System Inc. At issue in Octane was whether the ‘exceptional case’ standard for awarding attorneys’ fees in patent litigation under 35 USC § 285 was too high and at issue in Highmark was whether a district court’s award under § 285 should be subject to deference or reviewed de novo. Justice Sonia Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the court in both cases, which was unanimous except for Justice Antonin Scalia disagreeing with three footnotes in Octane.
While the effect of these decisions on reducing patent troll litigation remains to be seen, they could have an immediate impact on the various legislative patent litigation reform proposals being considered in Congress.
The court’s opinions lower the standard for awarding attorneys’ fees and reviewing such decisions, overruling the Federal Circuit’s standard from Brooks Furniture Mfg Inc v Dutailier Int’l Inc, 393 F. 3d 1378 (2005)…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the DLA Piper briefing.
News from DLA Piper
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from DLA Piper
DLA Piper has released the 1 September 2014 issue of its Health Alert, which focuses on judgments, legislation and reports in the health sector.
DLA Piper’s privacy experts have compiled a list of dos and don’ts for addressing privacy compliance in M&A transactions.
Analysis from The Lawyer
Shearman & Sterling is making its presence felt in the City, squaring up to magic circle firms and looking to muscle in on key relationships. Private equity house Bridgepoint is one outfit that has had its head turned by the US firm.
A new breed of lawyer is smoothing the path for companies entering emerging or unstable jurisdictions