Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Ron Epstein (left) and Sabrina Chang, Epicenter IP Group

There has been an increase in the award of legal fees to the prevailing party in patent litigation. With the Senate’s latest patent reform proposal looking to enshrine the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent holding in Octane Fitness v. Icon Health and Fitness, it appears that trial courts are going to be applying an “objective unreasonableness” standard to determine whether fees are warranted under Section 285.

This is a fine standard, but what does it actually mean in practice?

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.