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
06 February 2025
In the News
Vanessa Miller Assesses Panama Canal Discourse
Foley & Lardner LLP partner Vanessa Miller commented in SupplyChainBrain article, "The Fight for Control of the Panama Canal," lending important context to the recent headlines over the important waterway.
06 February 2025
In the News
Gregory Husisian Weighs in on Suspension of De Minimis Trade Exemption
Foley & Lardner LLP partner Gregory Husisian offered context on President Trump's recent trade actions on China in The Wall Street Journal article, "Why Trump Is Closing a Trade Exemption for China."
04 February 2025
In the News
Andrew Wronski on Tariff Fluidity – 'Keep on top of the issues'
Foley & Lardner LLP partner Andrew Wronski assessed the evolving shift in U.S. trade policy in the Milwaukee Business Journal article, "Trump tariffs won't disappear — so how should Wisconsin businesses prepare?"