• Over at Patent Progress, Dan O’Connor has an interesting post
    Image courtesy of athenatechs.com

    in which he addresses the recent use of standard-essential patents in the “smartphone wars” within the larger context of the standard-essential patent universe.  Like several of the entities who submitted public comments on the FTC-Google consent decree, O’Connor argues that when it comes to dealing with patent issues in the high-technology arena, standard-essential patent issues are just a small part of a larger puzzle.

  • In other standard-essential patent news, a group of economists from the Competition Policy Institute recently published a paper calling for greater clarity in standard-setting organization patent and licensing policies.  More from Law360.
  • This past Friday, Judge Lucy Koh issued an order vacating nearly half of the $1.05B verdict that a Northern District of California jury had awarded to Apple for Samsung’s infringement of various Apple intellectual property.  Because the jury had based its damages figures for some of the Samsung products on improper legal theories or incorrect notice dates, Judge Koh ordered a new trial for damages on these products.  More on Judge Koh’s ruling from Groklaw and AllThingsD.
  • Lastly, you can’t get away from sequestration talk — not even here.  Dennis Crouch at Patently-O takes a look at how the sequester will affect the USPTO and the Federal Circuit.