Starting biglaw salaries

A forum for applicants and admitted students to ask law students and graduates about law school and the practice of law.
User avatar
alphasteve
Posts: 16275
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Starting biglaw salaries

Postby alphasteve » Fri May 15, 2015 3:35 pm

Desert Fox wrote:lol no. PTAB is being less insane on throwing out patents and the Fed Cir will make sure they do even less. Also ARE HERO ED Texas isn't holding cases.

All of this. I'd actually like to see stats on the number of IPRs filed on patents being litigated in E.D. Tex. vs. all other Jx. Given that they won't grant a stay for a single fucking reason other than a joint motion, defendants lose a decent amount of incentive for filing 'em. That said, I wonder what, if anything, will change based on the new judge when Davis comes off the bench and is replaced.

User avatar
ExBiglawAssociate
Posts: 2094
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:06 pm

Re: Starting biglaw salaries

Postby ExBiglawAssociate » Fri May 15, 2015 4:41 pm

alphasteve wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:lol no. PTAB is being less insane on throwing out patents and the Fed Cir will make sure they do even less. Also ARE HERO ED Texas isn't holding cases.

All of this. I'd actually like to see stats on the number of IPRs filed on patents being litigated in E.D. Tex. vs. all other Jx. Given that they won't grant a stay for a single fucking reason other than a joint motion, defendants lose a decent amount of incentive for filing 'em. That said, I wonder what, if anything, will change based on the new judge when Davis comes off the bench and is replaced.


http://www.postgranthq.com/wp-content/u ... porter.pdf

Obviousness invalidation is twice as likely in the PTAB than in district courts. That, and the rate of invalidation under 101, should scare the bejesus out of patent plaintiffs.

User avatar
alphasteve
Posts: 16275
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Starting biglaw salaries

Postby alphasteve » Fri May 15, 2015 5:20 pm

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:
alphasteve wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:lol no. PTAB is being less insane on throwing out patents and the Fed Cir will make sure they do even less. Also ARE HERO ED Texas isn't holding cases.

All of this. I'd actually like to see stats on the number of IPRs filed on patents being litigated in E.D. Tex. vs. all other Jx. Given that they won't grant a stay for a single fucking reason other than a joint motion, defendants lose a decent amount of incentive for filing 'em. That said, I wonder what, if anything, will change based on the new judge when Davis comes off the bench and is replaced.


http://www.postgranthq.com/wp-content/u ... porter.pdf

Obviousness invalidation is twice as likely in the PTAB than in district courts. That, and the rate of invalidation under 101, should scare the bejesus out of patent plaintiffs.

I mean.. your contention was that PTAB is going to bring down the patent system, not scare patent plaintiffs.

I mean, I agree with two things: (1) there is a very high success rate of invalidation at the PTAB, especially compared to district court and (2) the PTAB is a bit of a fucking kangaroo court.

But, I think there is a little confirmation bias in the stats regarding challenges: you are looking data that is still in the prime time (maybe trailing edge) of pretty loose NPE litigation where the goals have been nearly extortative toward quick settlement. This could mean, and certainly would have incentivized, litigation of very broad patents that (from my experience) have pretty early priority dates--dates when, let's say, the PTO wasn't the most diligent in their review. You know, those less than 100 page file wrappers? So, my question on the data is are we looking at a situation where plaintiffs were asserting low hanging fruit patents which are then getting challenged and are low hanging fruit for invalidation as well.

Also, this doesn't address the E.D. Tex. vs. other Jx distinction either. I mean, if you take a judgment of infringement (an no invalidity, if a non-RPIA to the lit filed the IPR/CBM petition), I'm pretty sure the existing case law doesn't let you take a subsequent invalidation at the PTO to the trial court for an auto reconsideration or Rule 50(b). Nor are they given much weight at the Fed. Cir., IIRC.

User avatar
ExBiglawAssociate
Posts: 2094
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:06 pm

Re: Starting biglaw salaries

Postby ExBiglawAssociate » Fri May 15, 2015 5:56 pm

alphasteve wrote:
Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:
alphasteve wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:lol no. PTAB is being less insane on throwing out patents and the Fed Cir will make sure they do even less. Also ARE HERO ED Texas isn't holding cases.

All of this. I'd actually like to see stats on the number of IPRs filed on patents being litigated in E.D. Tex. vs. all other Jx. Given that they won't grant a stay for a single fucking reason other than a joint motion, defendants lose a decent amount of incentive for filing 'em. That said, I wonder what, if anything, will change based on the new judge when Davis comes off the bench and is replaced.


http://www.postgranthq.com/wp-content/u ... porter.pdf

Obviousness invalidation is twice as likely in the PTAB than in district courts. That, and the rate of invalidation under 101, should scare the bejesus out of patent plaintiffs.

I mean.. your contention was that PTAB is going to bring down the patent system, not scare patent plaintiffs.

I mean, I agree with two things: (1) there is a very high success rate of invalidation at the PTAB, especially compared to district court and (2) the PTAB is a bit of a fucking kangaroo court.

But, I think there is a little confirmation bias in the stats regarding challenges: you are looking data that is still in the prime time (maybe trailing edge) of pretty loose NPE litigation where the goals have been nearly extortative toward quick settlement. This could mean, and certainly would have incentivized, litigation of very broad patents that (from my experience) have pretty early priority dates--dates when, let's say, the PTO wasn't the most diligent in their review. You know, those less than 100 page file wrappers? So, my question on the data is are we looking at a situation where plaintiffs were asserting low hanging fruit patents which are then getting challenged and are low hanging fruit for invalidation as well.

Also, this doesn't address the E.D. Tex. vs. other Jx distinction either. I mean, if you take a judgment of infringement (an no invalidity, if a non-RPIA to the lit filed the IPR/CBM petition), I'm pretty sure the existing case law doesn't let you take a subsequent invalidation at the PTO to the trial court for an auto reconsideration or Rule 50(b). Nor are they given much weight at the Fed. Cir., IIRC.


Eh, the PTAB moves fast enough that most d. ct. trials won't be completed, even in ED Tex., before final judgments from PTAB come out.

I mean, just looking at Docket Navigator, shitheads like Princeton Digital don't appear to be filing ANYTHING these days, even though they are maintaining some of their already-filed cases.

User avatar
alphasteve
Posts: 16275
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Starting biglaw salaries

Postby alphasteve » Fri May 15, 2015 6:41 pm

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:
Eh, the PTAB moves fast enough that most d. ct. trials won't be completed, even in ED Tex., before final judgments from PTAB come out.


I don't know about this point. E.D. Tex. is still scheduling trials at roughly the 2 year mark, from my recollection. PTAB has one year from institution (and is tracking about that long), but that doesn't count the 3 months between petition and institution decision deadline. Defendants have 1 year from complaint to file their petition. Now, none are really waiting that long (at least because of RPIA/JDG issues), but figure no defendant is really strongly considering it until at least the P.R. 3-3/3.4 deadlines, which get set for roughly 6 weeks after scheduling conference. So we are basically on top of each other at that point, plus or minus 6 months. And then once you consider Rehearing Request and Notice of Appeal by P.O. at the PTAB, you aren't going to have something solid by then. (That said, I don't know if there's been an instance yet where a court has determined whether a FWD has the finality to dispose of a district court case yet where there is an anticipated appeal.)




Return to “Ask a Law Student / Graduate”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: shineoncrazydiamond, tedler and 3 guests