Responding to Patent Demand Letters: Leveraging State Laws on Bad Faith Assertion of Patents
Determining What to Include or Exclude in Response, Minimizing Risk of Litigation
Recording of a 90-minute CLE webinar with Q&A
Conducted on Thursday, March 2, 2017
Recorded event now available
This CLE webinar will provide guidance to patent counsel for responding to demand letters. The panel will discuss legal and strategic considerations, as well as current and proposed state laws addressing bad faith assertion claims. The panel will also discuss what to include or exclude in the response to avoid creating potential harm in future litigation.
Patent disputes often start with the patent holder sending a demand letter to the alleged infringer. The best way to respond to demand letters, especially those from nonpracticing entities (NPEs), remains a challenge for many companies. After receiving a demand letter, the recipient should act to minimize or remove the risk to its business.
Recent state actions addressing bad faith assertions should also be considered. In the last two years, states have stepped in to fill a void left by Congress regarding bad faith patent assertions.
Over half the states have now passed laws to limit abusive practices by putting restrictions on patent demand letters. States have taken a variety of approaches to tackle the issue of bad faith patent assertions.
Responding to demand letters involves strategic decision-making, including factors such the patent owner’s proclivity for litigation, the relationship with the patent owner, the strength of the allegations, and what is being demanded by the patent owner.
Listen as our authoritative panel of patent attorneys examines how patent counsel should proceed upon receipt of a demand letter, including a discussion of legal and strategic considerations. The panel will also discuss current and proposed state laws, offer guidance on responding to patent demand letters, and outline navigating the new state laws.
- Considerations in determining whether to respond to the demand letter
- State laws regarding bad faith assertion of patents
- Responding to patent demand letters
The panel will review these and other key issues:
- What are the key considerations for patent counsel when evaluating whether and how to respond to patent demand letters?
- What is the effect of state laws on bad faith assertion claims on the response to a demand letter?
- What are some of the pitfalls patent counsel confront in responding to demand letters—and how can they be avoided?
Sharon A. Israel, Partner
Ms. Israel focuses her practice on intellectual property law with an emphasis in patent litigation, opinion work and client counseling. She has acted as counsel in IP cases before district and appellate courts, the ITC, and the PTAB. Ms. Israel has litigated patents relating to a variety of technologies, including cellular communications systems and devices, oilfield equipment, consumer electronics, chemical compositions, and medical devices, among others. She is a frequent speaker on patent-related topics, and has served in leadership roles in numerous organizations.
Brian R. Iverson, Member
Bass Berry & Sims,
Mr. Iverson concentrates his practice in complex commercial litigation matters, including intellectual property disputes, in federal courts, state courts, administrative proceedings, and alternative dispute resolution proceedings across the country. He has extensive experience representing clients ranging from individuals and small businesses to multi-billion dollar corporations as both plaintiffs and defendants in high-stakes litigation. Mr. Iverson's broad experience allows him to quickly understand his clients' business objectives and offer cost-effective strategies to achieve those objectives.
Baldassare Vinti, Partner
Mr. Vinti’s practice focuses on litigating patent, false advertising, trade secret, trademark and contractual matters in federal and state courts and before the International Trade Commission. He is a skilled IP litigator with extensive experience in all aspects of litigation, including trials (jury and bench), Markman hearings, appeals before the Federal Circuit, case preparation and strategy, depositions, motion practice, and settlement negotiations. Mr. Vinti is an author and frequent commentator on patent issues pertaining to medical devices and a host of other IP topics.
CLE On-Demand - Streaming Video
Includes recorded streaming video of full program plus PDF handouts.
On-demand is the only recorded format recognized for CLE credits in DE, IN, KS, LA, MS, NC, OH, OK, SC, TN, VA, WI.
AK, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN*, KS, KY, LA, ME, MN, MO, MT, NC, ND, NH**, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH*, OK, OR, PA, SC, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI, WV, WY (Note: Some states restrict CLE eligibility based on the age of a program. Refer to our state CLE Map for additional information.)
*Only available for attorneys admitted for more than two years. For OH CLE credits, only programs recorded within the current calendar year are eligible - contact the CLE department for verification.
**NH attendees must self-determine if a program is eligible for credit and self-report their attendance.
CLE On-Demand Video $297.00
Includes full event recording plus handouts.
Strafford is an approved provider and self-study CLE credit is available in most states.
AK, AZ, CA, CO, CT, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, KY, ME, MN, MO, MT, ND, NJ, NM, NY, OR, PA, TN, TX, UT, VT, WA, WV, WY (Note: Some states restrict CLE eligibility based on the age of a program. Refer to our state CLE Map for additional information.)
Strafford will process CLE credit for one person on each recording.
Additional copies of a recording can be purchased at a discount. Please call Strafford Customer Service toll-free at 1-800-926-7926 ext 10 or email email@example.com to place your order.
Recorded Webinar Download $297.00
Recorded Audio Download (MP3) $297.00
DVD (Slide Presentation with Audio) $297.00 plus $9.45 S&H
Strafford webinars offer several options for participation: online viewing of speaker-controlled PowerPoint presentations with audio via computer speakers or via phone; or audio only via telephone (download speaker handouts prior to the program). Please note that our webinars do not feature videos of the presenters.
CLE Credits By State
Strafford provided an enthusiastic presentation that focused on patent practice, not theory.
David H. Vance
Vance Intellectual Property
I liked the practical insights, particularly when tied to cases the presenters had worked on.
The program material was well organized and presented in a succinct fashion.
Bass, Berry & Sims
A focused presentation offering practical information in a concise format.
Locks Law Firm
Patent Law Advisory Board
Fulbright & Jaworski
Winston & Strawn
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan
Feinberg Day Alberti & Thompson
Senior IP Counsel
Strafford webinars are backed by our 100% Unconditional Money-Back Guarantee: if you are not satisfied with any of our products, simply let us know and get a full refund. For more information regarding complaints and refunds, please contact us at 1-800-926-7926 ext 10. Complaints regarding this program can be submitted via the course evaluation found in the “Thank you” e-mail at the end of the course.