直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • News
  • Finnegan Facts
  • History
    • Finnegan VISION
    • Finnegan FORWARD
  • Pro Bono
  • Management
    • Pricing & Alternative Fee Arrangements
    • AFA Models We Offer
    • Contingency Fees
    • AI + KM

Media Mention

4 Ways to Knock Out a Frivolous Patent Suit in East Texas

November 9, 2015

Law360

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas is known for being a difficult forum in which to succeed against a frivolous patent suit. Summary judgment rulings are rare, as the judges favor plaintiffs’ right to a jury trial. Law360 spoke with Finnegan attorney Lionel M. Lavenue about his thoughts on navigating frivolous patent cases in the Eastern District of Texas, based on his experience with the court.

Lavenue noted that the judges in the Eastern District of Texas do not favor Rule 11 motions, including those that seek sanctions. He said, “Because of the very gentlemanly and gentlewomanly approach to law that the Eastern District of Texas bar practices, you just don’t bring those types of motions. While I do appreciate that professional camaraderie, the inability for there to be a possibility for Rule 11 motions does make it easier for plaintiffs to bring nuisance lawsuits … and they can push the limits even further than in jurisdictions where that remedy is available.”

He then went on to discuss his strategy for clients faced with a frivolous patent suit. Despite the low probability of Rule 11 motions being granted in the Eastern District of Texas, Lavenue said that he sends a letter letting the plaintiff know that his client will try to pursue Rule 11 sanctions anyway. He then attaches that letter to the court filing seeking an early claim construction hearing or a motion to dismiss. He said, “The advantage of the early letter is it prepares the plaintiff to be reasonable as early as possible in the case, so that hopefully you can get the number to a nuisance value range or get a dismissal of the complaint, and the letter brief does the exact same thing.”

Tags

Eastern District of Texas

Related Practices

Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials

Related Professionals

Lionel M. Lavenue
Partner
Reston, VA
+1 571 203 2750
Email

Related News

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Recognized Again Among Germany’s Leading Law Firms

October 9, 2026

Press Release

Finnegan Secures Summary Determination of No Violation in ITC Vehicle Space Guards Investigation for Drop Stop

October 6, 2026

Commentary

Catching Up with Hope Shimabuku

September 29, 2026

Commentary

Federal Circuit Revives Whistleblower Complaint Over VA's AI Claims-Processing Tool

September 25, 2026

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Named an IP Litigation Powerhouse in BTI Litigation Outlook 2027

September 24, 2026

Press Release

Finnegan Secures Precedential Pro Bono Federal Circuit Victory for AI Whistleblower

September 23, 2026

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Receives Top Tier Rankings in World Trademark Review’s Inaugural Copyright 1000 2026

September 23, 2026

Commentary

Pepsi's U.S. Trademark Dispute Could Reshape Brand Choices, Lawsuit Strategy, Lawyers Say

September 17, 2026

Commentary

Jellycat’s ‘Dupe’ Dilemma: Can IP Protect a ‘Cute’ Aesthetic?

September 16, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP