Injunctive Relief For Patents In San Antonio
Description
Form popularity
FAQ
In many patent suits, patent holders seek injunctive relief to prevent an accused infringer from continuingto practice the patented invention. Whether an injunction can be granted depends on various considerations a judge may weigh under her equitable powers.
Indian Patent Act 1970-Sections. (1) The reliefs which a court may grant in any suit for infringement include an injunction (subject to such terms, if any, as the court thinks fit) and, at the option of the plaintiff, either damages or an account of profits.
Common defences against infringement include patent invalidity, non-infringement, and prior use. Legal and technical experts can play a crucial role in building a strong case.
Generally, injunctive relief is only available when there is no other adequate remedy available and irreparable harm will result if the relief is not granted.
Such exceptions are experimental or research use; use on foreign vessels; obtaining regulatory approval from authorities; exhaustion of patent rights and parallel imports; compulsory licensing and use or acquisition of inventions by government.
Upon finding for the claimant the court shall award the claimant damages adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by the infringer, together with interest and costs as fixed by the court.
Injunctive Relief It usually involves an order that a court issues to prevent an infringer from continuing in any infringed activity. It is granted in cases where there is a large possibility that the patent holder will prevail at trial and if the patent holder suffers irreparable harm.
Injunctive relief usually takes one of three forms: temporary restraining order (TRO), preliminary injunction, and permanent injunction.
The party seeking a preliminary injunctive relief must demonstrate: (1) irreparable injury in the absence of such an order; (2) that the threatened injury to the moving party outweighs the harm to the opposing party resulting from the order; (3) that the injunction is not adverse to public interest; and (4) that the ...
