Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> IP ADR Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Patent Law
: IP ADR BlogSpeedy Patent Trials? Check Out the Northern District of California
By Les Weinstein, Michael Young, John Leo Wagner, Eric van Ginkel, and Victoria Pynchon

We mediators long for the day when we can no longer use the expense, delay and uncertainty of trial as a good reason to settle your patent litigation. Why? Because mediation, as Diane Levin recently wrote, is simply an alternative -- not necessarily the "appropriate" -- means of resolving your clients' dispute. (See the Mediation Channel's post Debating the Meaning of "A" in ADR here)
It gives mediators no pleasure, and does our profession no good, for litigants to walk away from meritorious lawsuits because the chance to obtain justice through the justice system is not a genuine option anymore.
So we're pleased to bring you the good news that the Northern District of California is making a serious effort to get your patent case to trial with fewer delays (and less cost) than has been the rule of late.
Excerpt of a recent Duane Morris Client Update on the new Northern District Rules with a link to the full article below.
New Rules in the N.D. of California Seek to Accomplish More Efficient Patent Trials, with the Help of KSR
Patent litigants, patent rocket dockets, and entities seeking a more streamlined patent litigation should take notice of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California’s recent modification of its patent trial rules. Much is at stake in choosing where to file a multimillion-dollar patent litigation. Salient factors in selecting a forum include the court's docket backlog and its perception of patents. Now, the local rules are playing a much more prominent role and should be analyzed lest a patent party be beset with frustration and major setbacks. Here, the Northern District of California's recent actions in revising its local rules demand scrutiny by in-house and outside counsel in formulating a patent litigation strategy.
To read the full text of this Alert, please click here.
Full post as published by IP ADR Blog on March 11, 2008 (boomark / email).
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Dumb California Laws
Stupid Laws in the Sunshine State
Zantac Patent
GlaxoSmithKline and Cypress Pharmaceutical settle patent infringement dispute.
Soliris Patent
Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc. agrees to pay the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation a $10 million patent infringement settlement.
DRAM Patent
ProMOS Technologies and Mosel Vitelic pay MOSAID Technologies an undisclosed patent infringement settlement.
No Signature Required
Wachovia to pay up to $125 million settlement in check cashing lawsuit.
Security Breach
Check 'N Go to pay $220,000 settlement in personal information lawsuit.
Check Cashing Bankruptcy
Zvi Guttman pays $210,000 settlement.

Comments on the Northern District's Local Patent Rules
9th Circuit Modifies Local Patent Rules
Northern District of California Adopts Revised Model Jury Instructions for Patent Cases
Northern District of California Considering Changes to Its Local Patent Rules
Western District of Wisconsin as New Patent Rocket Docket









