For the last week or two, many of the big New York City law firms have been raising associate salaries — a $15k bump for young associates and a $20k bump for more senior ones — raising starting salaries to $160,000 for first year associates.  It has not hit Chicago directly yet, but the Tribune ran a front page article on it Sunday, Raising The Bar For Legal Salaries.  Several large Chicago firms asked to comment for the story all said "they were still discussing the issue and had not made a decision on whether to raise salaries."

If you want more information on the raises, check out the excellent coverage at Above The Law (an entertaining site by former AUSA and creator of Underneath Their Robes David Lat) and The WSJ Blog.

Judge Pallmeyer, as the Chair of Northern District’s Historical Association, sent a letter to the Chicago Association of Law Libraries seeking any historical information about the Court and significant cases before it that local firms or practitioners may have in their archives.  Here is Judge Pallmeyer’s request in her own words:

We are aware that some of the local law firms themselves maintain archives that might relate to our court’s history.  Might your firm maintain such an archive?  If you have retained materials that might be of interest to our Association, would you please contact me?  One of the members of our Association, or a legal historian who is working with us, would very much appreciate the opportunity to review them.  I can be reached at (312) 435-5636 or by e-mail CourtHistory_ILND@ilnd.uscourts.gov.

If you have something, send it on and let them know you saw the request here.

Black & Decker Inc. v. Robert Bosch Tool Corp., No. 04 C 7955, 2006 WL 3883937 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 27, 2006) (St. Eve, J.).

Judge St. Eve denied defendant’s emergency motion to prohibit plaintiff from sending Rule 65(d) notice letters regarding the Court’s permanent injunction to defendant’s customers (more on this case and the injunction in the Blog’s archives). But before analyzing defendant’s emergency motion, the Court first addressed defendant’s prior motion to clarify the injunction which the Court previously denied. In the motion to clarify, defendant stated that it had sold approximately 150,000 infringing radios to various resellers prior to being enjoined. Defendant argued that those resellers should be free to sell their supplies of infringing radios. The Court denied the motion because it was first raised in a sur-reply brief regarding plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction without presentation of any detailed facts, legal argument or supporting case law. 

Continue Reading Make Your Arguments Early and Often: Counsel are Both Advocates and Officers of the Court

Black & Decker Inc. v. Robert Bosch Tool Corp., No. 04 C 7955, 2006 WL 3883286 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 18, 2006) (St. Eve, J.).*

Judge St. Eve denied defendant’s motion for vacature of a lost profits award and for a new trial.  First, defendant argued that the jury’s finding that it induced infringement could not stand because it shipped the product at issue with an AC power cord (non-infringing) and a battery (infringing), but plaintiff had not shown that each individual sale of a product resulted in an infringing use.  Prior to trial defendant argued that plaintiff must show a one-to-one correspondence between each unit sold and a customer’s direct infringement citing Chiuminatta concrete Concepts, Inc. v. Cardinal Indus., Inc., 1 Fed. Appx. 879 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (unpublished op.).  The Court denied that argument.  In its post-trial motion, defendant argued that proof of sales is not sufficient for an award of induced infringement citing Golden Blount, Inc. v. Robert H. Peterson Co., 438 F.3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2006).  But the Court distinguished Golden Blount because the issue in that case was that some product was returned to the alleged infringer before being assembled into an infringing product, which may or may not have been sold.  There was no induced infringement because the product at issue may never have been sold.  In the instant case, the Court held that the product with the infringing configuration had been sold and, therefore, upheld the jury’s finding of induced infringement.

Continue Reading Jury’s Award Is Supported By The Evidence

Black & Decker Inc. v. Robert Bosch Tool Corp., No. 04 C 7955, 2006 WL 3883919 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 7, 2006) (St. Eve, J.).

This is Judge St. Eve’s permanent injunction order (numerous opinions from this case and its resulting jury trial have been analyzed in the Blog and can be found in the Blog’s archives).  The injunction is notable for its thoroughness, in describing both the claims at issue and the enjoined products or classes of products.  The order even includes electrical schematics of a portion of the enjoined invention.

Wednesday, February 7 is IP Day in Chicago.  This annual event at Loyola (where I previously taught Legal Writing) will focus on a hot topic for IP litigators — the Supreme Court’s recent active role in defining intellectual property law.  You can see from the event brochure that the day is full of great speakers focused on very interesting topics.  Of special note, John Whealan, the USPTO’s Deputy General Counsel for IP and Solicitor, is giving the key note speech.  I have heard Mr. Whealan speak on several occasions and can confirm that he is an excellent speaker who always provides a very interesting and thoughtful perspective on any issue he addresses.  This is an event that you should not miss.  I certainly will not miss it, if you see me there please say "hello."

Black & Decker v. Robert Bosch Tool Corp., No. 04 C 7955, 2006 WL 3883921 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 20, 2006) (St. Eve, J.).

Judge St. Eve’s latest opinion in this patent dispute awarded plaintiff its costs pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 54(d) over defendant’s objection that plaintiff’s alleged misconduct.  My analysis of Judge St. Eve’s opinion which analyzed defendant’s misconduct allegations, as well as opinions addressing numerous other aspects of this case and the resulting trial, can be found in the Blog’s archives.  In response to defendant’s allegations of misconduct, the Court cited her previous opinion finding that there was no misconduct and noted that counsel for both parties "exhibited rigorous advocacy on behalf of their clients."  The remainder of the opinion determined which requested fees were appropriate.  It serves as an excellent primer on what fees will be paid in the Northern District and what acceptable charges are for those fees.

A recent post complimenting The Blog by Mike Atkins at the Seattle Trademark Lawyer Blog (thanks Mike) jump started a post I had been planning for a while.  There are a growing number of blogs following IP issues in different regions of the country (and world), what Mike refers to as our "cousin" blogs.  So, here a list of the regional IP blogs that I know about.  All of them offer interesting content, much of  which is useful beyond their home regions:

 
 
 
Illinois Trial Pratice Weblog (okay, it is not IP specific, but it is regional and provides excellent content)
IP Dragon (China)
 
 
Patent Trademark Blog (some Orange County focus)

If you know of other regional IP blogs, post a comment or send me an email (dave.donoghue@yahoo.com) and I will add them to the list.

*The Florida IP Blog is another blog developed and hosted by LexBlog just like this Blog and, as usual, it is a great looking site with easy navigation.

Chicago-Kent College of Law and Loyola University Chicago School of Law  (where I previously served as an Adjunct Professor of Legal Writing) are jointly sponsoring and hosting the Chicago Intellectual Property Colloquium.  The Colloquium brings six nationally renowned IP scholars to Chicago to discuss their current IP research. The presentations look very interesting.  They start January 30th and run through April on Tuesday afternoons (schedule after the jump).  Each lasts just under two hours and they rotate between Kent and Loyola.  

Attendance is by invitation only.  If you would like an invitation, contact Patricia O’Neal at Kent — poneal@kentlaw.edu.  I will be attending as many as I can and blogging about them afterward.  If you see me, please say "hello."

Continue Reading Chicago IP Colloquium Presented by Kent and Loyola