Contact Information

Program in Intellectual Property Law

Patricia O’Neal
565 W. Adams St., Room 723
Chicago, IL 60661
ipconference@kentlaw.iit.edu
P: (312) 906-5128
F: (312) 906-5280

A A | Email | Print | Share

Supreme Court IP Review (SCIPR)

The Supreme Court IP Review (SCIPR) is a conference designed to provide intellectual property practitioners, jurists, legal academics and law students with a review of IP cases from the U.S. Supreme Court's previous Term, a preview of cases on the docket for the upcoming Term, and a discussion of cert. petitions to watch.

SCIPR 2014

When:
Friday, September 12, 2014

Where:
IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law
565 West Adams Street
Chicago, IL 60661

CLE:
This conference is eligible for 5.25 hours of IL MCLE credit.

Online registration is now available.


Agenda

8:00 – 8:30 am

Registration and continental breakfast


8:30 – 8:40 am

Welcome Remarks — Dean Harold J. Krent, IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law


8:40 – 9:30 am

Highmark Inc. v. Allcare Health Management System (Standard of review of a court's fee award pursuant to "objectively baseless" patent claims.)

Octane Fitness v. Icon Health & Fitness Inc. (When is a case "exceptional" for award of fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285, when a defendant prevails in a patent infringement action?)

Moderator:
David Clough, Partner, Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP

Panelists:

Dominic Perella, counsel to Highmark Inc.
Rudolph Telscher, counsel to Octane Fitness
Constantine Trela, Jr., counsel to Icon Health
Professor David Schwartz, IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law


9:35 – 10:25 am

Limelight Networks v. Akamai Technologies (Induced infringement when defendants have not directly infringed.)

Medtronic, Inc. v. Boston Scientific Corp. (Whether licensee or patentee has burden of proof in licensee's declaratory judgment action.)

Moderator:
Grantland Drutchas, Partner, McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Panelists:

J.C. Rozendaal, counsel to Limelight Networks
Thomas Saunders, counsel to Medtronic, Inc.
Professor Cynthia Ho, Loyola University Chicago School of Law
Professor Timothy Holbrook, Emory University School of Law


10:25 – 10:40 am

Coffee Break


10:40 – 11:25 am

Petrella v. MGM (Can laches bar a copyright claim within the 3 year statute of limitations?)

Moderator:
Robert Surrette, Partner, McAndrews Held & Malloy Ltd.

Panelists:

Paula Petrella, petitioner
Professor Stephanos Bibas, counsel to Petrella, University of Pennsylvania Law School Supreme Court Clinic
Mark Perry, counsel to MGM
Professor Tyler Ochoa, Santa Clara University School of Law


11:30 am – 12:15 pm

ABC, Inc., v. Aereo, Inc. (Whether Aereo's Internet streaming of local TV broadcasts to individual subscribers is a public performance under copyright.)

Moderator:
Bart Lazar, Partner, Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Panelists:

David Frederick, counsel to Aereo Inc.
Paul Smith, counsel to petitioner broadcasters
Professor Peter Menell, University of California Berkeley School of Law
Professor Rebecca Tushnet, Georgetown University Law Center


12:15 – 1:15 pm

Lunch


1:20 – 2:00 pm

Keynote Lecture:
"Stalemate or Statesmen? What Is Needed to Move Forward Constructively with the Balancing of America's IP System"

David Kappos, Partner, Cravath, Swaine & Moore


2:05 – 3:00 pm

Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank (Patentable subject matter of software-related inventions)

Nautilus v. Biosig Instruments (Patent indefiniteness.)

Moderator:
Thomas Pasternak, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP

Panelists:

Constantine Trela, Jr., counsel to Alice Corp.
Mark Perry, counsel to CLS Bank International
John Vandenberg, counsel to Nautilus, Inc.
Professor Rebecca Eisenberg, University of Michigan Law School
Professor Ronald Mann, Columbia Law School


3:00 – 3:15 pm

Coffee break


3:15 – 4:05 pm

Lexmark Int'l v. Static Control Components (Standard for determining standing for false advertising claim under the Lanham Act.)

POM Wonderful v. Coca-Cola (Standing under the Lanham Act to challenge food or beverage label as false or misleading under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.)

Moderator:
Scott Burow, Partner, Banner & Witcoff Ltd.

Panelists:

Jameson Jones, counsel to Static Control Components
Thomas Saunders, counsel to POM Wonderful
Professor Rebecca Tushnet, Georgetown University Law Center


4:10 – 4:25 pm

Supreme Court Analytics on the Past Term

Professor Edward Lee, IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law
Professor David Schwartz, IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law


4:30 – 5:20 pm

Preview of the Upcoming Term: Cert. petitions granted & to watch, Supreme Court IP practice

Hana Financial, Inc. v. Hana Bank (Whether the court or the jury determines if use of an older mark may be tacked to a newer one.)

B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc. (Whether the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's finding of a likelihood of confusion precludes respondent from relitigating that issue in infringement litigation, and, if not, what deference should the trial court give to the TTAB finding.)

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. (Whether a district court's factual finding in support of its construction of a patent claim term may be reviewed de novo, as the Federal Circuit requires—and as the panel explicitly did in this case—or only for clear error, as Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a) requires.)

Moderator:

Professor Christopher Schmidt, Director, Institute on the Supreme Court of the United States (ISCOTUS), IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law

Panelists:

David Frederick, counsel to Aereo Inc.
Jameson Jones, counsel to Static Control Components
Professor Peter Menell, University of California Berkeley School of Law 
Dominic Perella, counsel to Highmark Inc.
Constantine Trela, Jr., counsel to Alice Corp.
Thomas Saunders, counsel to POM Wonderful
Mark Perry, counsel to CLS Bank International


5:25 – 6:30 pm

Reception