September 29, 2016
Forbes
In a review of the Supreme Court's upcoming Fall docket, Forbes contacted Finnegan attorney J. Michael Jakes for his thoughts on the intellectual property cases that the high court plans to hear. In Samsung v. Apple, the case revolves around design patents and whether infringers are ordered to give up the total profits earned from the product, even if only one feature of the design infringed. Jakes said, "It's going to come down to a statutory language argument. Even if people have a more restricted view of what patents are worth, it's a fairly broad statute."
In Life Technologies v. Promega, Life Technologies shipped a non-infringing biotech compound to a UK subsidiary, and the UK subsidiary then created an infringing product that was imported back into the United States. Congress passed a law that held exporters liable for components they ship overseas with the intention of being combined into infringing products and shipped back to the United, however, the law is quite broad and they left it up to courts to interpret what it means. Jakes said, "...if you're really supplying a commodity chemical and don't know what they're doing with it, there won't be inducement."
Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc., Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp.
Commentary
Patent Strategy Could Shape Financing, Valuation and Risk in Offshore Energy Projects
June 30, 2026
Award/Ranking
Finnegan’s European Practices and Attorneys Highlighted in 2026 Managing IP Rankings
June 25, 2026
Press Release
BMW Obtains Preliminary Injunction Against Zync; Federal Court Orders Zync to Halt ITC Trade Secret
June 23, 2026
Award/Ranking
Six Finnegan Partners Recognized in the 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global IP Lawyers
June 22, 2026
Commentary
U.S. Judge Rules Forum-Selection Clause Bars Zync from Pursuing ITC Trade Secret Case
June 15, 2026
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.