The Peculiarity of the Calculation of Damagesin a Design Patent Infringement Suitin the U.S. and its suggestion given to us - focused on Apple v. Samsung Case -

2016 ◽  
Vol 65 (6) ◽  
pp. 228-273
Author(s):  
Wonmo Ahn
Keyword(s):  
Patent Infringement ◽  
Design Patent ◽  
The U.S

Patent Infringement of Innovations by Foreign Competitors: The Role of the U.S. International Trade Commission

1989 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 63-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Thomas
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
The United States ◽  
Patent Infringement ◽  
Foreign Firms ◽  
International Trade Commission ◽  
Barriers To Entry ◽  
Foreign Competitors ◽  
Problem Data ◽  
The U.S

Patent infringement by foreign firms in U.S. markets challenges the effectiveness of legal patents as barriers to entry for firms developing marketing strategy for innovations. The United States International Trade Commission, an independent regulatory agency with broad powers to investigate patent infringement and other international marketing issues, offers a possible remedy for this problem. Data from 195 patent infringement cases completed since 1974 are the basis for discussing issues related to the ITC's role as regulator over a 14-year period.

scholarly journals International Trade Commission Exclusion Orders for the Infringement of Standard-Essential Patents

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Sidak
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Trade ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Patent Infringement ◽  
International Trade Commission ◽  
Patent Holder ◽  
Standard Essential Patents ◽  
Section 337 ◽  
The U.S

In the United States, a patent holder can pursue several remedies against a patent infringer. Section 284 of the Patent Act provides that, upon a finding of infringement, “the court shall award the claimant damages adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty . . . .” In addition, § 283 provides that a court “may grant injunctions in accordance with the principles of equity to prevent the violation of any right secured by patent.” Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 also allows a patent holder to petition the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC)—a federal agency that investigates matters of international trade and advises on international trade policy— to issue an exclusion order against an infringer, a remedy that denies the importation and sale in the United States of products that infringe a valid and enforceable U.S. patent.3 In a case of patent infringement, a patent holder may thus seek damages for the infringement, an injunction, and an exclusion order.

scholarly journals Patent Watch

2012 ◽  
Vol 134 (04) ◽  
pp. 40-41
Author(s):  
Kirk Teska
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Patent Infringement ◽  
Good Chance ◽  
Patent Holder ◽  
Patent Owner ◽  
Royalty Rate ◽  
Preliminary Injunction ◽  
The U.S

This article discusses the significance of injunctions in patent infringement lawsuits. In earlier times, if a patent owner sued for patent infringement, the patent owner had a good chance of winning a preliminary injunction prohibiting sales of the allegedly infringing product pending the outcome of the trial. If the patent owner then won the trial, a permanent injunction was almost automatic. In 2001, it became much harder to win a preliminary injunction. All the accused infringer had to do was put up some kind of defense in order for the judge to deny the patent holder a preliminary injunction pending the outcome of the trial. The odds of obtaining a permanent injunction has been affected by several fairly recent cases as well. In 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that permanent injunctions, even when the patent holder wins, are no longer guaranteed. Some judges later ruled that the patent-infringing company, so long as it paid a license, could keep selling the infringing product. The judges even set the royalty rate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document