article thumbnail

Clarity May Be Around the Corner for Antitrust Scrutiny of Reverse Payment Settlements

JD Supra Law

Actavis that reverse payment settlements—or settlements where a patent holder pays an accused patent infringer cash or other consideration to end the patent litigation—may be subject to antitrust scrutiny if they are "large and unjustified," lower courts have been in search of an administrable pleading standard for these claims.

article thumbnail

News Flash: China parallel patent infringement litigation gives Nanoco leverage in the $150million settlement with Samsung

JD Supra Law

In March, Samsung agreed to pay UK Nanotechnology Company Nanoco USD 150 million in a patent infringement dispute over patents used in QLED televisions that featured legal team from Wei Chixue Law Firm of Linda Liu Group - a Top 10 IP Law Firm in China. By: Linda Liu & Partners

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Patent Enforcement: How To Stop Patent Infringement

Patent Trademark Blog

Almost everyone knows that patent infringement lawsuits are expensive. If patent infringement litigation is so costly, what options are available to startups and small businesses? Need a cost-effective patent enforcement strategy? How can small businesses afford patent litigation?

article thumbnail

Samsung Settles TV Patent Litigation Campaign For $150M

IP Law 360

A British nanotechnology company said Friday it landed $150 million from its litigation-funded patent infringement lawsuits against Samsung that ended in a settlement last month, just as jury selection was set to kick off in one of the cases in Marshall, Texas.

article thumbnail

Recent Caltech Settlements Point to Strength of Cases Against Other Big Tech Firms

IP Watchdog

Following years of infringement litigation over its patented wireless chip technologies, the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) has recently enjoyed a pair of settlement outcomes pointing to the strength of the research university’s patent holdings.

article thumbnail

The Sham Litigation Exception after AbbVie - Is the Subjective Element a Sham?

JD Supra Law

The FTC claimed that the manufacturers had brought “sham” patent infringement litigation in 2011 against Teva and another generic supplier, Perrigo. The FTC also claimed that the December 2011 Teva settlement constituted an illegal reverse payment settlement under FTC v. Actavis, in violation of Section 5.

article thumbnail

Litigation as a Source of Profit? Non-Practicing Entities and Patent Litigation

IPilogue

Litigation is almost always recommended to be avoided , whether because of the sheer amount of time needed to get a court date, the expensive costs for the client and law firm, or the risks associated with receiving an unfavorable judgement. They do not practice, develop, manufacture, or otherwise commercialize the patent.