Post-Sale Restrictions: Protecting Patented Products After Lexmark
Recording of a 90-minute premium CLE webinar with Q&A
This CLE course will review the Supreme Court’s Lexmark decision and discuss the impact of the decision for the patent world. The panel will provide insight into protecting patent products without post-sale restrictions.
- Impression Products v. Lexmark Int’l
- Implications of the decision for patent practice
- Best practices for protecting patented products without post-sale restrictions
The panel will review these and other key issues:
- What implications does Lexmark have for patent practice?
- What types of licenses are enforceable under contract law?
- What strategies can patent owners and counsel employ to control use of patent products after a sale?
O'Melveny & Myers
Companies turn to Mr. Dolak for his insider perspective of the technology industry, having spent 15 years in the... | Read More
Companies turn to Mr. Dolak for his insider perspective of the technology industry, having spent 15 years in the computer industry before pursuing law. That technical and business experience informs his structuring and negotiation of technology-related transactions, including the acquisition and sale of technology companies and IP; the development, licensing and implementation of technology, software and other IP; and commercial transactions such as distribution, OEM, manufacture, supply and service agreements. Mr. Dolak also advises clients with respect to enterprise software license and implementation agreements, and IT and business process outsourcing.Close
Audra C. Eidem Heinze
Ms. Heinze applies a strategic and creative approach to resolving client needs, whether related to complex litigation,... | Read More
Ms. Heinze applies a strategic and creative approach to resolving client needs, whether related to complex litigation, opinion work, or transactional issues involving patents, trademarks, or copyrights. Her experience involves an extensive range of fields including, imaging devices and supplies, computer hardware and software, and athletic footwear, apparel and equipment. Ms. Heinze has represented clients in numerous proceedings across the country, including in California, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Texas, the International Trade Commission, the PTAB, and the TTAB. She successfully sought affirmance at the U.S. Supreme Court—in a unanimous decision—of the lower court’s dismissal of the defendant’s trademark invalidity counterclaim.Close
Timothy C. Meece
Banner & Witcoff
Mr. Meece has over 20 years of experience litigating and trying complex intellectual property cases. His reputation as... | Read More
Mr. Meece has over 20 years of experience litigating and trying complex intellectual property cases. His reputation as an effective and winning first-chair trial lawyer has been earned representing both Fortune 500 companies and small clients in IP infringement lawsuits in district courts throughout the country and in inter partes reviews in the PTAB in electrical, computer hardware/software, mechanical, and chemical arts, and also for copyright infringement with respect to computer software. He also handles trademark proceedings before the TTAB. Mr. Meece has won on behalf of multiple defendants facing potential liability of hundreds of millions of dollars.Close