[20191211]LSB10348_收费与否:最高法院将考虑专利纠纷中的律师费.pdf

上传人:任我行 文档编号:28729 上传时间:2022-06-24 发布时间:2019-12-12 格式:PDF 页数:5 大小:655.79KB
下载 相关 举报
[20191211]LSB10348_收费与否:最高法院将考虑专利纠纷中的律师费.pdf_第1页
第1页 / 共5页
[20191211]LSB10348_收费与否:最高法院将考虑专利纠纷中的律师费.pdf_第2页
第2页 / 共5页
[20191211]LSB10348_收费与否:最高法院将考虑专利纠纷中的律师费.pdf_第3页
第3页 / 共5页
[20191211]LSB10348_收费与否:最高法院将考虑专利纠纷中的律师费.pdf_第4页
第4页 / 共5页
[20191211]LSB10348_收费与否:最高法院将考虑专利纠纷中的律师费.pdf_第5页
第5页 / 共5页
亲,该文档总共5页,全部预览完了,如果喜欢就下载吧!
资源描述

1、CRS Legal Sidebar Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Legal SidebarLegal Sidebari i To Fee or Not to Fee: Supreme Court to Consider Attorneys Fees in Patent Disputes Updated December 11, 2019 UPDATE (December 11, 2019): On December 11, 2019, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Peter

2、v. NantKwest, Inc. Justice Sotomayors opinion for a unanimous court held that the United States Patent and Trademark Office is not entitled to recover the salaries of its legal personnel under 35 U.S.C. 145. The Court reasoned that 145 implicates the American Rules presumption that each side pays fo

3、r its own attorneys, and that it had “never suggested that any statute is exempt from the presumption against fee shifting.” The Court then held that 145s use of the term “expenses” was not a sufficiently clear indication that Congress intended to depart from the American Rule presumption. According

4、ly, the Court affirmed the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The original post on Peter v. NantKwest, from October 3, 2019, is reproduced below. When a court case is over, who pays the attorneys? Under the “American Rule,” the presumption in the United States is that eac

展开阅读全文
相关资源
猜你喜欢
相关搜索
资源标签

当前位置:首页 > 法规条令 > CRS 美国国会研究处报告