The USPTO had historically sought relatively minor expenses such as travel costs and expert fees. However, in 2013, the USPTO began seeking reimbursement of its attorneys’ fees, whether or not the appeal was affirmed or remanded.
Parties have argued this approach violates the “American Rule” that litigants generally pay their own legal fees unless the prevailing party is entitled to recover its fees either by statute and/or contractual right.
In 2015, the Fourth Circuit approved the USPTO’s policy. However, in July the en banc Federal Circuit overturned its prior ruling on this policy and found the USPTO’s policy violated the American Rule.
The USPTO claims the reimbursement of fees are necessary to pay for the more expensive de novo appellate option. Opponents of the policy argue the policy makes district court appeals too expensive and only available for the richest applicants.
Stay tuned for further updates and the US Supreme Court decision on this issue.
If you have questions or would like to learn more about how our trademark litigation attorneys at Widerman Malek can help, contact us today.
At Widerman Malek, our team has helped numerous clients manage the complexities of divorce in…
In the world of intellectual property, inventorship is a critical and often misunderstood concept. Determining…
When it comes to resolving business disputes, mediation offers a uniquely effective approach that goes…
Widerman Malek is excited to sponsor the Junior Achievement of the Space Coast Business Hall…
Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) reporting under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) is back in effect…
We are excited to welcome attorney Jeff Smith to the firm’s Celebration office. Bringing over…