Please join us for the SoCal IP Institute meeting, Monday, January 17 at Noon. This activity is approved for 1 hour of MCLE credit. If you will be joining us, please RSVP to  Amanda Jones by 9 am Monday.

We will be discussing the following:

iLOR, LLC v. Google, Inc., No. 10-1117, 1172  (Fed. Cir. Jan. 11, 2011) (case attached)  iLOR appealed from an order finding that the underlying district court litigation was “exceptional” under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and awarding attorneys’ fees and costs and expenses.  The decision was based on a finding that iLOR’s proposed construction of the term “the toolbar being displayable based on a location of a cursor in relation to a hyperlink in a first page in a first window of an application” as including a toolbar displayed upon a right-mouse click was “baseless” by the district court.  The Federal Circuit reversed finding that the proposed construction of the term was not “objectively baseless”, likening the relevant “exceptional case” inquiry to that of a finding of willful infringement.

Warrior Sports, Inc. v. Dickinson Wright, P.L.L.C., No. 10-1091  (Fed. Cir. Jan. 11, 2011) (case attached) Warrior  appealed a decision of the Eastern District of Michigan dismissing a malpractice suit brought by Warrior against its IP counsel.  The Federal Circuit vacated the dismissal order because the underlying malpractice claim required the district court to determine whether or not Warrior would have been successful in its patent infringement lawsuit but for the actions of the defendants.  Accordingly, the Federal Circuit determined that the issue arose under 28 U.S.C. § 1338 which gave the district court exclusive patent subject-matter jurisdiction.