A team of Foley attorneys including partner Jonathan Moskin, senior counsels Brian Kapatkin and Katherine Califa and associate Eoin Connolly are appealing to the Fourth Circuit a district court award of $76,000 in attorneys’ fees to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office stemming from a trademark dispute with the travel site Booking.com that the agency lost.
Both the Fourth Circuit and the Federal Circuit had previously issued panel rulings upholding the USPTO’s demand for attorneys’ fees after certain types of appeals, regardless of who wins the case. But on July 27, the full Federal Circuit reversed that court’s 2017 decision, ruling that the agency’s fee policy violates the so-called American Rule, which holds that the parties generally must pay their own legal fees.
The Foley team, in a July 31 filing, cited the Federal Circuit’s ruling in Booking.com’s appeal before the Fourth Circuit, according to Law360. While acknowledging that the Fourth Circuit is not bound by any Federal Circuit decision, it said the Fourth Circuit’s 2015 ruling in favor of the USPTO “cannot be squared” with U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
“The Federal Circuit in [its July 27 ruling] specifically analyzed the applicable precedent in this jurisdiction…in reaching its contrary conclusion,” the attorneys wrote. “Thus [the ruling] left no doubt as to the bases for the different outcomes.”
Both the Fourth Circuit and the Federal Circuit had previously issued panel rulings upholding the USPTO’s demand for attorneys’ fees after certain types of appeals, regardless of who wins the case. But on July 27, the full Federal Circuit reversed that court’s 2017 decision, ruling that the agency’s fee policy violates the so-called American Rule, which holds that the parties generally must pay their own legal fees.
The Foley team, in a July 31 filing, cited the Federal Circuit’s ruling in Booking.com’s appeal before the Fourth Circuit, according to Law360. While acknowledging that the Fourth Circuit is not bound by any Federal Circuit decision, it said the Fourth Circuit’s 2015 ruling in favor of the USPTO “cannot be squared” with U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
“The Federal Circuit in [its July 27 ruling] specifically analyzed the applicable precedent in this jurisdiction…in reaching its contrary conclusion,” the attorneys wrote. “Thus [the ruling] left no doubt as to the bases for the different outcomes.”
People
Related News
24 April 2024
In the News
Judith Waltz Discusses Nursing Home Staffing Mandate, Potential Legal Challenges
Foley & Lardner LLP partner Judith Waltz offers insight on a new nursing home staffing rule from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and its impact on the industry in the Bloomberg Law article, “Nursing Homes, HHS on Collision Path Over Staffing Mandate.”
23 April 2024
In the News
David Sanders Discusses Lessons Learned from General Counsel Leadership Program
Foley & Lardner LLP partner David Sanders recently joined a panel discussion with members of The Vanguard Network’s General Counsels Advisory Group to discuss the evolving role of the general counsel.
23 April 2024
In the News
Claire Marblestone Discusses HHS Final Rule on Protected Health Information Disclosure
Foley & Lardner LLP Claire Marblestone assessed the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ final rule that bars providers, health plans, and other entities covered by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act from disclosing protected health information in a Healthcare Dive article.