It’s been a busy week for those filing patent and copyright suits.

News comes that computer maker Dell Inc. has been sued by DE Technologies over a business method patent originally applied for in 1996 and issued in 2002. Several aspects of the case are interesting. Continue Reading Dell, Amazon and Disney Targets of New Patent and Copyright Suits

The questions often come up. Why should a lawyer take a case on a contingency? Why should a client seek or agree to a contingent fee arrangement? Don’t contingency cases promote frivolous litigation? Isn’t this just a form of ambulance chasing?

To those who look down on the contingency fee lawyer I ask, “are you willing to risk your time and effort for your client?” (If your answer is “yes, but only at $500/hour,” I consider that a “no.”) The fact is contingency fee arrangements have a proud and honorable place in legal practice. Often, they are the only way individuals and smaller companies can actually gain access to the courts and legal system their taxes support. Continue Reading Why Contingent Fees?

A welcome treat for most patent litigators is the chance to handle a “design patent” case. These cases don’t appear too often, but when they do, they’re invariably interesting. Today’s Federal Circuit decision in Bernhardt, L.L.C. v. Collezione Europa USA deals with this fascinating subject.

On the surface, design patents seem quite simple. Unlike their far more common “utility patent” brethren, design patents do not protect the functional features of an invention. Quite the contrary, they protect only the “ornamental features” of a product. Basically, this means that the appearance of a product can be protected with a design patent – provided the appearance is new, unobvious and not otherwise subject to any of the various pitfalls that delight defense attorneys while dashing the dreams of patentees and their counsel. Continue Reading Federal Circuit Clarifies Evidentiary Standard for Proving Design Patent Infringement

That’s the title of Michael Smith’s excellent op-ed piece appearing in last week’s “Texas Lawyer.” Michael ably takes on those who naively claim that patent owners, and the lawyers who help them, are “patent pirates.” “Plaintiffs in patent litigation are hardly pirates -they are simply investors who bought an asset and seek a return on their money.” No argument from me on that.

A copy of Michael’s article is available at his “Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice” blog. Check it out.

I suppose it’s natural that your views on the patent system depend largely on who you are and where you stand. Thus it doesn’t surprise me that, according to a recent article, Sun Microsystem’s President and CEO Jonathan Schwartz thinks the U.S. is “too free to issue patents.” Striking a little closer to home, he also has some choice comments for “spurious litigators” (who? me?) who, supposedly, somehow stand in the way of “innovation.” Continue Reading Sun Head Slams Patent System

The core mission of the Mann Law Group is to provide high quality patent trial lawyer services on a contingent fee basis. The lack of adequate funds should never deter you from pursuing otherwise meritorious patent and other intellectual property claims. The Mann Law Group offers a variety of contingent fee and alternative billing arrangements that make it possible for individuals and smaller businesses to enforce their patent and other intellectual property rights in a cost effective and practical manner.

If the high cost of traditional hourly billing has kept you from pursuing your claim, do not hesitate to contact us. We will be happy to review your case and discuss ways for bringing it to a successful conclusion in a way you can afford.

Before suing, it’s a good idea to make sure you have a case. It’s also a good idea to play by the rules. Lest anyone forget, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued 2.7 million “reminders” last week to a company that brought an ill-considered copyright infringement case against Compaq Computer Corporation. Continue Reading Uh…Can We Take a Mulligan?

The always interesting subject of “do it yourself patenting” came up in Steve Nipper’s “The Invent Blog” earlier today. (Steve somewhat graphically likens this to pulling your own teeth.) Obviously, those of us professionally engaged in obtaining and enforcing patents have a personal stake in the matter – which might bias our thinking a bit. But still, I agree with Steve and think there’s a lot to be said for leaving patent prosecution to those who know what they’re doing. As someone who frequently has to defend the validity of patents in court, I speak from experience here. Continue Reading Do it yourself?