Advocacy Articles - Standard List
-
AIPLA Comments Regarding the TTAB Standard Protective Order
January 2, 2018
The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) is pleased to have this opportunity to provide comments on the current version of the USPTO’s Standard Protective Order for use in TTAB opposition and cancellation proceedings. -
AIPLA Comments to the Current TTAB Standard Protective Order
January 2, 2018
The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) is pleased to have this opportunity to provide comments on the current version of the USPTO’s Standard Protective Order for use in TTAB opposition and cancellation proceedings. -
Letter to Senate Judiciary Committee on Andrei Iancu Nomination
December 13, 2017
The American Intellectual Property Law Association submitted a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee in support of the nomination of Andrei Iancu to be the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). -
Nantkwest, Inc. v. Matal, Fed. Cir., No. 2016-1794, 11/22/2017.
November 22, 2017
Section 145 of the Patent Act, which permits disappointed patent applicants to seek district court review of PTO decisions, does not permit awards of attorneys' fees to PTO lawyers participating in the proceeding, according to an AIPLA brief to the en banc Federal Circuit. -
Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene's Energy Group, LLC, U.S., No. 16-712, 8/31/2017.
August 31, 2017
Congress's decision to permit the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to adjudicate and if necessary cancel issued patents does not violate the separation of powers doctrine or the Seventh Amendment, according to a brief filed August 31, 2017, at the Supreme Court. -
In re Silver, Sup. Ct. of Texas, No. 16-1682, 8/10/2017
August 9, 2017
Communications between a patent agent and a client should enjoy the protections of an attorney-client privilege when those communications occur within the scope of a patent agent’s authority under the Patent Act, according to an AIPLA letter brief filed August 10, 2017, in the Supreme Court of Texas. -
AIPLA and PhRMA Comments on Draft Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Relating to Civil or Commercial Matters Currently Being Negotiated at The Hague Conference on Private International Law
July 19, 2017
We question whether the Draft Convention adequately takes into account the particular territorial nature of patent rights and whether it sufficiently respects the established international framework within which patent law functions. -
Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Fed. Cir., Nos. 16-1284, 7/14/2017
July 14, 2017
A Federal Circuit panel misconstrued the statutory language and legislative history of 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), as amended by the America Invents Act (AIA), when it invalidated a patent based on a press release and SEC filing about a sales agreement by the patent owner, according to an AIPLA amicus brief urging en banc review of the case. -
AIPLA Comments to the Department of Commerce Regarding the Position of USPTO Director
June 28, 2017
As the Administration considers filling that position, we would like to share directly with you our views on some of the leadership traits that we believe are important for that position. -
Letter to Senate Judiciary Committee on Vishal Amin Nomination
May 23, 2017
The American Intellectual Property Law Association submitted a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee in support of the nomination of Vishal Amin’s nomination to be the United States Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator. -
Letter to House Judiciary Committee in Support of the Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act of 2017
March 27, 2017
The American Intellectual Property Law Association submitted a letter to the House Judiciary Committee in Support of H.R. 1695, the “Register of Copyrights Selection and Accountability Act of 2017.” AIPLA welcomes this important proposed reform and urges its prompt consideration. -
WiFi One, LLC v. Broadcom Corp., Fed. Cir., No. 2015-1944, amicus brief filed 2/23/2017
February 23, 2017
The statute (35 U.S.C. 314(d)) barring appeals of Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions to institute inter partes review proceedings (IPR) does not apply to the statute (35 U.S.C. 315(b)) prohibiting the Board from instituting an IPR on a petition filed more than one year after the petitioner was sued for infringement, according to an AIPLA amicus brief to the en banc Federal Circuit. -
AIPLA Comments Submitted Pursuant to Request for Additional Comments Regarding Section 512 Study
February 21, 2017
Although the mechanisms of Section 512 are used now more than ever, many stakeholders believe the system can be improved substantially, and in a variety of ways that reflect the “great diversity among the categories of content creators and ISPs who comprise the Internet ecosystem.” -
TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, U.S., No. 16-341, amicus brief filed 2/6/2017
February 6, 2017
The Federal Circuit correctly interpreted the general venue statute at 28 U.S.C. 1391 as providing a definition of “resides” in the patent venue statute at 28 U.S.C. 1400(b). -
Letter to House Judiciary Committee in Response to US Copyright Office Reform Proposal
January 30, 2017
The American Intellectual Property Law Association is pleased to provide comments in response to the House Judiciary Committee’s policy proposal, titled “Reform of the U.S. Copyright Office,” arising from the Committee’s review of US copyright law, released on December 8, 2016 (“Policy Proposal”). AIPLA welcomes the proposed reforms, as set forth in more detail in the letter. -
Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc., U.S., No. 15-1189, amicus brief filed 1/24/2017
January 24, 2017
The Supreme Court's decisions in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 133 S. Ct. 1351 (2012), and Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc., 553 U.S. 617 (2008), require no change to the Federal Circuit law of international patent exhaustion and conditional sales, AIPLA argued to the Supreme Court in a January 24, 2017 amicus brief.
-
Lee v. TAM, U.S., No. 15-1293, amicus brief filed 11/18/2016.
November 18, 2016
The Lanham Act ban on registering a mark that “may disparage” is unconstitutionally vague under the 5th Amendment and violates the First Amendment as applied to “The Slants” name for a band of Asian musicians, AIPLA argued to the Supreme Court in a November 18, 2016 amicus brief. -
In re Aqua Products, Inc., Fed. Cir., No. 2015-1177, amicus brief filed 10/4/2016
October 4, 2016
The right of a patent owner to amend its patent claims in an inter partes review proceedings is improperly limited by the PTAB requirement that the patent owner bear the burden of persuasion that the amended claims are patentable, AIPLA argued to the en banc Federal Circuit in an amicus brief filed October 4, 2016. -
Life Technologies Corp v. Promega Corp, U.S. No. 14-1538, amicus brief filed 9/8/2016
September 8, 2016
Patent infringement liability under 35 U.S.C. §271(f)(1) for supplying a “substantial portion of the components” of the invention may be established by supplying a single component that is crucially important to a multi-component invention, AIPLA argued to the Supreme Court in a brief filed September 8, 2016. -
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple, Inc., U.S., No. 15-777, amicus brief filed 8/4/2016
August 4, 2016
The plain language and legislative history of 35 U.S.C. 289 demonstrates that Congress has provided design patent owners with an infringement remedy of the infringer's profits that is based on the total, unapportioned revenue from sales of the entire article of manufacture, AIPLA argued August 4, 2016, in a Supreme Court amicus brief.