University of Texas Law logo Update your account
  • Sign in or Join Account and Briefcase
    Not a member yet? Sign up Forgot password?
  • Accredited CLE
    Live Conferences Studio Webcasts eConferences eCourses Hooked on CLE Answer Bar
  • Research & Self-Study
    Materials eLibrary
  • Subscriptions
    MCLE On-Demand and eLibrary
  • Browse by Practice Area
    Administrative Admiralty and Maritime Alternative Dispute Resolution Appellate - Civil and Criminal Bankruptcy Business Entities Civil Rights Construction Corporate Counsel Criminal Cybersecurity Elder Law and Guardianship Employment Entertainment and Sports Law Environmental Essentials Ethics Exempt Organizations / Nonprofits Family Government Enforcement / White Collar Crime Healthcare Immigration Insurance Intellectual Property / Patent Law International Law Practice Management Litigation M&A and Securities Oil, Gas and Energy Practice Skills Real Estate Renewable Energy School Self-Care Taxation Technology Technology for Lawyers Trusts and Estates / Probate Water
  • Search
  • Shopping Cart

What are you searching for?

Skip to main content
UT Law CLE logo
  • Overview /
  • Schedule /
  • Faculty /
  • Credit Info /
  • Key Dates /
  • Venue /
  • Sponsors
Register or Buy ticket icon Buy
Conference art

2005

Advanced Patent Law Institute

San Jose, CA Dec 1-2, 2005 Fairmont Hotel, San Jose, CA
Conference Concluded
Buy
Related products: Materials
Brochure thumbnail
Download Brochure (PDF)

Overview

The Institute will include participation from patent attorneys, valuation experts, government officials, federal judges and academics, with a distinguished faculty addressing issues faced by practitioners in corporate IP departments and leading law firms. This year’s conference will feature sessions on prosecution strategies, avoiding claims for willful infringement, joint defenses, protecting IP in China, the territoriality principle, standard-setting, open source and more.

  • Buy

Event Schedule

Program is subject to change.
All times are Central Time Zone.

  • Day 1 December 1, 2005
  • Day 2 December 2, 2005
  • Time
    Credit
    Subject
    Speaker
  • Thursday Morning, Dec. 1, 2005
    Presiding Officer:
    Robert Barr, Berkeley Center for Law and Technology - Berkeley, CA
  • 9:00 am
    0.50 hr
    Limits on Changing Claims During Prosecution
    A discussion of the limitations on adding, changing, and amending claims during prosecution posed by the written description, enablement, and best mode requirements, as well as by the doctrine of prosecution laches.

    Deanna L. Kwong, Covington & Burling - San Francisco, CA

  • 9:30 am
    0.50 hr
    Pre-filing Investigations, Including Prosecution Perspectives
    This session covers professional obligations in standards of inquiry before filing a declaratory judgment claiming invalidity or unenforceability.

    Charles S. Crompton, Latham & Watkins LLP - San Francisco, CA

  • 10:00 am
    0.75 hr
    Claim Construction in Light of Phillips
    A discussion and review of the continued Federal Circuit explorations of claims construction—“plain meaning,” dictionaries, intrinsic, extrinsic, and other evidence—in light of Phillips.

    Vernon M. Winters, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP - San Jose, CA

  • 11:05 am
    0.75 hr
    Best Practices for Avoiding Claims for Willful Infringement: Options, Opinions and Privilege
    In-house counsel, opinion counsel, and litigation counsel discuss best practices to avoid claims for willful infringement, including practical and ethical issues involving exculpatory patent opinions and special problems involving waiver of privilege, including implications of Knorr-Bremse.

    Michelle Lee, Google, Inc. - Mountain View, CA
    Barton E. Showalter, Baker & Botts L.L.P. - Dallas, TX
    Ragesh Tangri, Keker & Van Nest LLP - San Francisco, CA

  • 11:50 am
    0.50 hr
    Inequitable Conduct
    A detailed discussion of the inequitable conduct issues faced by IP asset managers and their patent counsel in managing a patent portfolio, prosecuting patent applications, and enforcing U.S. patents.

    Matthew F. Weil, McDermott, Will & Emery - Irvine, CA

  • Thursday Afternoon, Dec. 1, 2005
    Presiding Officer:
    Edward C. Kwok, MacPherson Kwok Chen & Heid LLP - San Jose, CA
  • 1:30 pm
    0.50 hr
    Written Description and Section 112: Impact on Biotech Patenting
    Recent Federal Circuit cases discussing written description suggest that the Court’s stance on this doctrine may be shifting. Is biotech finally getting a break in Capon v. Dudas? Is it really all about new matter as suggested in Pandrol v. Airboss? And what might we expect next?

    Karen Boyd, Patent Mediation and Consulting - Palo Alto, CA

  • 2:00 pm
    0.50 hr
    Doctrine of Equivalents
    How viable is the doctrine of equivalents as an infringement theory post-Festo, and how is it proven at trial?

    Paul Grewal, Day Casebeer Madrid & Batchelder LLP - Cupertino, CA

  • 2:30 pm
    0.50 hr
    Remedies in Component and Downstream Cases, Including ITC Options
    Discussion of the problems and solutions for the patent owner when an infringing part is used in building a larger system. Includes discussion of avenues for pursuing (1) foreign infringers and assemblers, (2) importers, and (3) domestic sellers, in both district court and the ITC. Will also cover the limits on injunctive relief and customs seizure when the value of the larger system far exceeds the value of the infringing component, and recovering damages for loss of market share and lost profits from foreign infringers.

    L. Scott Oliver, Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy - Palo Alto, CA

  • 3:20 pm
    0.50 hr
    Joint Defenses and Joint Defense Privilege
    A discussion of key issues and pitfalls arising in joint defenses, including the latest case law on waiver of privilege.

    Daralyn Durie, Keker & Van Nest LLP - San Francisco, CA

  • 3:50 pm
    0.50 hr
    Developing and Protecting IP in China Including Patent Prosecutions
    Key issues and pitfalls in prosecuting and enforcing patents in China, including lessons learned and practical tips on how to win patent infringement suits there.

    Catherine Sun, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP - Shanghai, China

  • 4:20 pm
    1.00 hr
    Judicial Panel
    A panel of distinguished and experienced federal judges will discuss, from a judicial perspective, some of the complexities of patent litigation and how you can help address them.

    Hon. Jeremy D. Fogel, United States District Court, Northern D - San Jose, CA
    Hon. Susan Y. Illston, U.S. District Court For The Northern Dis - San Francisco, CA
    Hon. Elizabeth D. Laporte, U.S. District Court For The Northern Dis - San Francisco, CA
    Vernon M. Winters, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP - San Jose, CA

  • Time
    Credit
    Subject
    Speaker
  • Friday Morning, Dec. 2, 2005
    Presiding Officer:
    Jean Burke Fordis, Finnegan, Henderson & Farabow, et al. - Palo Alto, CA
  • 8:30 am
    0.50 hr
    102 (b)
    What conduct triggers the on sale of public use bars of Section 102(b)? What conduct constitutes experimental use? This discussion will review recent Federal Circuit cases applying Section 102(b) and address the current state of the law.

    Soyeon Pak Laub, McDermott Will & Emery - Irvine, CA

  • 9:00 am
    0.50 hr
    Inducement and Indirect Infringement
    In its recent Grokster decision, the Supreme Court purported to apply the patent law doctrine of inducement of infringement to claims of copyright infringement. We will explore the extent to which the doctrine as articulated in Grokster in fact goes further than existing patent law, and consider the question of how patent law inducement doctrine might evolve in light of Grokster.

    Gary N. Frischling, Irell & Manella LLP - Los Angeles, CA

  • 9:30 am
    0.75 hr
    Extraterritoriality
    Federal Circuit cases have extended both prior art and infringement beyond U.S. borders. The Federal Circuit is considering whether to allow U.S. courts to hear foreign patent cases. We will discuss the limits and changes to the territoriality principle.

    Mark A. Lemley, Stanford Law School - Stanford, CA

  • 10:35 am
    0.50 hr
    The Statutory Research Infringement Exemption: How Far Back Is “Reasonably Related”?
    The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd., 125 S. Ct. 2372 (2005), enlarging the statutory research exemption to patent infringement of 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1), left several questions unanswered. For example: how far back the statutory exemption should apply, and what is the status of the common law experimental use defense to patent infringement. The Court left this specific guidance to the percolation of case law through the district courts and the Federal Circuit.

    Meredith M. Addy, Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione - Chicago, IL

  • 11:05 am
    0.50 hr
    Antitrust, Patents, and Standard-Setting
    Recent cases and investigations brought by the Federal Trade Commission and other enforcement agencies have highlighted the risks associated with enforcing patents covering products developed through industry standard-setting efforts. Standard-setting organizations are exploring changing the rules covering the disclosure of patents during the standards process. This session will cover the implications both of increased antitrust enforcement in this area and the standards community’s response, both of which lie at the crossroads of patent and antitrust law.

    Gil Ohana, Cisco Systems - San Jose, CA

  • 11:35 am
    0.75 hr
    Open Source: Giving Away Patents and Managing Open Source Assets
    This session opens by examining the generous grant of patent right under open source licenses, and the affect such grants have on industry standards. Other types of “give aways” via standards will also be discussed. The session closes with a discussion of practical strategies and policies to manage the use and acquisition of open source assets.

    Karen F. Copenhaver, Black Duck Software, Inc - Waltham, MA
    Lawrence Rosen, Rosenlaw & Einschlag Technology Law Offi - Ukiah, CA

  • Friday Afternoon, Dec. 2, 2005
    Presiding Officer:
    Christopher J. Byrne, National Semiconductor - Santa Clara, CA
  • 12:20 pm
    0.50 hr
    Lunch Presentation: Patent Reform: Winners, Losers and Prospects

    Peter N. Detkin, Intellectual Ventures - Los Altos, CA
    Richard J. Lutton Jr., Apple Computer Inc - Cupertino, CA
    James Pooley, Morrison & Foerster, LLP - Palo Alto, CA

  • 1:50 pm
    0.75 hr
    Patent Law and Policy for Public/Private Collaborations
    Open collaborations and communication among researchers is probably the best way to promote technological innovation. How will Prop 71 and the CREATE Act fare in fostering a collaborative environment? What lessons can be learned from BayhDole in shaping future laws and policies?

    Elizabeth A. Howard, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP - Menlo Park, CA
    Katherine Ku, Stanford University - Palo Alto, CA
    Gary H. Loeb, Genentech, Inc. - San Francisco, CA

  • 2:35 pm
    0.75 hr
    The Market for Buying and Selling IP
    A discussion of what’s happening, what are options for corporate buyers and sellers, what valuation models are being used, and more.

    Ron Laurie, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP - Palo Alto, CA
    David L. McCombs, Haynes & Boone, LLP - Dallas, TX
    Mallun Yen, Cisco Systems, Inc. - San Jose, CA

  • 3:20 pm
    0.50 hr
    Outlicensing Strategies
    A discussion of the factors that a large patent holder considers in establishing a licensing program and evaluating outbound license grants.

    John F. Schiffhauer, Intel Corporation - Santa Clara, CA

  • Day 1 December 1, 2005
  • Day 2 December 2, 2005
Download Schedule

Conference Faculty

Meredith M. Addy

Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione
Chicago, IL

Karen Boyd

Patent Mediation and Consulting
Palo Alto, CA

Karen F. Copenhaver

Black Duck Software, Inc
Waltham, MA

Charles S. Crompton

Latham & Watkins LLP
San Francisco, CA

Peter N. Detkin

Intellectual Ventures
Los Altos, CA

Daralyn Durie

Keker & Van Nest LLP
San Francisco, CA

Hon. Jeremy D. Fogel

United States District Court, Northern D
San Jose, CA

Gary N. Frischling

Irell & Manella LLP
Los Angeles, CA

William S. Galliani

Cooley Godward LLP
Palo Alto, CA

Paul Grewal

Day Casebeer Madrid & Batchelder LLP
Cupertino, CA

Elizabeth A. Howard

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
Menlo Park, CA

Hon. Susan Y. Illston

U.S. District Court For The Northern Dis
San Francisco, CA

Katherine Ku

Stanford University
Palo Alto, CA

Deanna L. Kwong

Covington & Burling
San Francisco, CA

Hon. Elizabeth D. Laporte

U.S. District Court For The Northern Dis
San Francisco, CA

Soyeon Pak Laub

McDermott Will & Emery
Irvine, CA

Ron Laurie

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Palo Alto, CA

Dale S. Lazar

DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary US
Reston, VA

Michelle Lee

Google, Inc.
Mountain View, CA

Mark A. Lemley

Stanford Law School
Stanford, CA

Gary H. Loeb

Genentech, Inc.
San Francisco, CA

Katherine Kelly Lutton

Fish & Richardson P.C.
Redwood City, CA

Richard J. Lutton Jr.

Apple Computer Inc
Cupertino, CA

David L. McCombs

Haynes & Boone, LLP
Dallas, TX

Gil Ohana

Cisco Systems
San Jose, CA

L. Scott Oliver

Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy
Palo Alto, CA

James Pooley

Morrison & Foerster, LLP
Palo Alto, CA

Lawrence Rosen

Rosenlaw & Einschlag Technology Law Offi
Ukiah, CA

John F. Schiffhauer

Intel Corporation
Santa Clara, CA

Barton E. Showalter

Baker & Botts L.L.P.
Dallas, TX

Catherine Sun

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Shanghai, China

Ragesh Tangri

Keker & Van Nest LLP
San Francisco, CA

Lee Van Pelt

Van Pelt, Yi & James
Cupertino, CA

Matthew F. Weil

McDermott, Will & Emery
Irvine, CA

Vernon M. Winters

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
San Jose, CA

Mallun Yen

Cisco Systems, Inc.
San Jose, CA

Planning Committee

Robert Barr—Co-Chair

Berkeley Center for Law and Technology
Berkeley, CA

Mark A. Lemley—Co-Chair

Stanford Law School
Stanford, CA

Karen Boyd

Patent Mediation and Consulting
Palo Alto, CA

Christopher J. Byrne

National Semiconductor
Santa Clara, CA

Charles S. Crompton

Latham & Watkins LLP
San Francisco, CA

William S. Galliani

Cooley Godward LLP
Palo Alto, CA

Paul Grewal

Day Casebeer Madrid & Batchelder LLP
Cupertino, CA

Benjamin W. Hattenbach

Irell & Manella
Los Angeles, CA

Elizabeth A. Howard

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
Menlo Park, CA

Sandeep Jaggi

Health Hero Network
Redwood City, CA

Michelle Lee

Google, Inc.
Mountain View, CA

Gary H. Loeb

Genentech, Inc.
San Francisco, CA

Katherine Kelly Lutton

Fish & Richardson P.C.
Redwood City, CA

David L. McCombs

Haynes & Boone, LLP
Dallas, TX

James Pooley

Morrison & Foerster, LLP
Palo Alto, CA

Matthew D. Powers

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
Redwood Shores, CA

Lee Van Pelt

Van Pelt, Yi & James
Cupertino, CA

Matthew F. Weil

McDermott, Will & Emery
Irvine, CA

Mallun Yen

Cisco Systems, Inc.
San Jose, CA

Credit Info

  • San Jose, CA
MCLE Credit
Toggle view Texas – 15.00 hrs  |  2.50 hrs Ethics
You may claim your credit online in Your Briefcase, and UT Law CLE will report credit on your behalf to the State Bar of Texas. A Certificate of Attendance will be provided in Your Briefcase for your records. The system reports Texas CLE credit every Tuesday. If you are claiming credit in the last week of your birth month, self-report your CLE credit directly to the State Bar of Texas at texasbar.com, using the course number  provided on your certificate of attendance.

Key Dates

San Jose, CA – Dec 1-2, 2005 – Fairmont Hotel, San Jose, CA
Conference Concluded
Buy
  • San Jose, CA
Standard Registration
Last day for $695.00 Regular pricing: Nov 22, 2005

$745.00 for registrations received after this time

Last day for cancellation (full refund): Nov 25, 2005

$50 processing fee applied after this date

Last day for cancellation: Nov 28, 2005

Venue

speaker

Fairmont Hotel, San Jose, CA

170 South Market Street
San Jose, CA
866-540-4494 (reservations)

Our Sponsors

Thank you to our sponsors! Click each logo below to learn more.

  • Navigant Consulting, Inc. logo
    Navigant Consulting, Inc.
    Navigant Consulting, Inc. (NYSE: NCI) is a specialized independent consulting firm providing litigation, financial, healthcare, energy and operational consulting services to government agencies, legal counsel and large companies facing the challenges of uncertainty, risk, distress and significant change. The Company focuses on industries undergoing substantial regulatory or structural change and on the issues driving these transformations. www.navigantconsulting.com www.navigantconsulting.com/
Download Sponsor Details Become a Sponsor
Become a Sponsor
Email UT Law CLE for more information on sponsoring an event.

Stay in the loop with UT Law CLE

Sign-Up Now  
Accredited CLE
Live Conferences
Studio Webcasts
eConferences
eCourses
Hooked on CLE
Answer Bar
Research & Self-Study
Materials
eLibrary

Subscriptions
MCLE On-Demand and eLibrary
Your UT Law CLE
Your Briefcase
Your Account
Your Cart
Redeem Your Code
Sign In or Join
About
Scholarships
Sponsorships
Speakers
Texas Law Resources
UT Law CLE
About Us
Our Volunteers
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Security
Help & Contact
FAQ
Contact Us
Facebook    LinkedIn    Youtube

© 2025 The University of Texas School of Law Continuing Legal Education | 512.475.6700 | Version 9.022.2

Back to top
More Information
Warning
Error
Warning
Please sign in to continue
Forgot Password   |  Create Account
Item has been added to your cart.

Item description

Checkout
Item has been added to your Briefcase.

Item description

Go to your Briefcase