The Chisum Patent Academy will hold its next Patent Law Seminars in Cincinnati, OH (March 10-11, 2016); Seattle, WA (August 4-5 and 8-9, 2016) (two identical seminars); and Washington, D.C. (September 2016).
Additional details about our Cincinnati, Ohio seminar (March 10-11, 2016).
Additional details about our Seattle seminars (August 4-5, 2016; August 8-9, 2016).
Additional details about our Washington, D.C. seminar (September 2016; exact dates TBA).
Each seminar is limited to ten (10) attendees. Our seminars are conducted in interactive, round-table style to maximize opportunities for discussion, questioning, and sharing best practices. All sessions are co-taught by Donald Chisum and Janice Mueller.
We update the syllabus for every seminar to include the latest and most significant Federal Circuit and Supreme Court patent law developments. Some topic areas are retained for multiple seminars (e.g., patent claim construction, inequitable conduct) but are always updated to include the latest developments.
Our most recent August 2015 Seattle seminar addressed the following topics: recent blockbuster Supreme Court and Federal Circuit decisions including Alice Corp. on Section 101 patent eligibility (and CAFC decisions applying Alice), Teva v. Sandoz on claim construction, Commil USA v. Cisco Sys. on induced infringement, Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment (upholding Brulotte prohibition on post-expiration patent royalties), SCA Hygiene Prods v. First Quality Baby Prods. (pending Fed. Cir. en banc re patent laches), Petrella (copyright laches), Limelight v. Akamai (Fed. Cir. en banc Aug. 13, 2015 re divided infringement), Halo Elecs. v Pulse Elecs. (denying rehearing en banc on willful infringment), Lexmark Int’l v. Impression Prods. (pending Fed. Cir. en banc on international exhaustion and post-sale restrictions), Williamson v. Citrix (presumption re means plus function claiming); the ongoing schism within the Federal Circuit on patent claim interpretation via application of “plain and ordinary meaning” and the claim differentiation doctrine versus discerning the “actual invention” from the specification; the new Supreme Court decisions on patent claim interpretation standards of review (Teva 2015) and the definiteness requirement (Nautilus 2014) and Federal Circuit decisions applying them; drafting and enforcing method and system claims (including drafting considerations targeting direct, inducing, and divided infringement problems); a series of recent Federal Circuit decisions concerning the exhaustion defense to patent infringement; and inter partes review statistics, case studies, and the Federal Circuit’s first decision on appeal from the merits of a PTAB IPR final decision, In re Cuozzo (July 2015 opinion superseding Feb. 2015 opinion, approving PTAB’s use of the broadest reasonable construction standard and denying motion to amend claims where patentee attempted to enlarge claim scope).
For our 3-day seminars, the Chisum Patent Academy will apply for 18 hours of CLE accreditation per seminar in those states where we conduct seminars. For our 2-day seminars, we will apply for 12 hours of CLE accreditation. Where state bars require, we submit attendees’ names as they are listed on the sign-in sheet. If you are seeking CLE credit for a state other than where that seminar is being held, please apply directly to the appropriate state bar. We are happy to assist you with all necessary documentation. More information about CLE accreditation.