直 Japanese PDF Font
  • 我们的专业人员
  • 服务
  • 我们的见解
  • 办公室
  • 事务所
  • 人才招聘
Finnegan
  • 新闻
  • 飞翰事实
  • History
    • Finnegan VISION
    • Finnegan FORWARD
  • 慈善性法律援助
  • 管理层
    • Pricing & Alternative Fee Arrangements
    • AFA Models We Offer
    • Contingency Fees
    • AI + KM

James R. Barney

Supreme Court's Fall Docket: Insider Trading, Samsung v. Apple, and Adult Diapers

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."

Tags

Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc., Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp.

Related Practices

全球知识产权维权、诉讼与审判

联邦巡回法院和最高法院上诉

Related Industries

化学

生物技术

电子与计算机技术

Related Professionals

J. Michael Jakes
合伙人
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4045
Email

Related News

Commentary

East Texas Reclaims Its Patent Crown

August 21, 2026

Media Mention

Law360's Legal Lions of the Week: Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.

August 21, 2026

Commentary

Early Test of USPTO's Ex Parte Preorder Filing Leads to Re-Exam Denial

August 21, 2026

Commentary

Why Global IP Litigants Keep Turning to English Courts

August 19, 2026

Media Mention

VW Wins in Patent Appeal Over Electrically Controlled Glasses

August 19, 2026

Media Mention

Federal Circuit Backs Volkswagen’s $207,500 Fees Against NPE

August 19, 2026

Press Release

USPTO Denies Super Lighting Reexamination Request Following PVTECH Pre-Order Submission Under New USPTO Procedure

August 19, 2026

Press Release

Federal Circuit Overrules Precedent En Banc in Finnegan Pro Bono Victory for Federally Employed Veterans

August 18, 2026

Commentary

Fed. Circ. Overrules Precedent on Veteran Hiring Protections

August 14, 2026

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

  • 隐私
  • 免责申明
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

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