Firm principal Jason Cassady wrote a year-in-review article for Texas Lawyer newspaper, the state’s oldest weekly publication devoted to law and legal issues. His article details the biggest developments in patent law during 2015, including three cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
DALLAS – Experienced intellectual property attorney Jason Cassady of Dallas’ Caldwell Cassady & Curry recently authored a year-in-review article for Texas Lawyer newspaper that details the biggest developments in patent law during 2015. Texas Lawyer is the state’s oldest weekly publication devoted to law and legal issues.
Mr. Cassady is a true trial lawyer and a veteran of numerous patent infringement lawsuits heard in Texas federal courts and other jurisdictions across the U.S. He focuses his practice on intellectual property litigation and commercial litigation, and several of his winning verdicts have been ranked among the Top 100 in the country.
The article authored by Mr. Cassady appears in Texas Lawyer’s 2015 Year in Review special section and is available online here (subscription only).
In addition to the three patent law cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court during the past year and the opening of a new Dallas regional outpost for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Mr. Cassady’s article also highlights two significant patent rulings issued in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas during the past year.
The Eastern District is home to the nation’s busiest patent docket, and Mr. Cassady has represented clients in the district’s various divisions for more than a decade. His article notes a significant ruling from Eastern District Judge Rodney Gilstrap that eliminated approximately 10 percent of the judge’s entire patent docket after he invalidated a patent for online shopping carts.
Judge Gilstrap also issued an order requiring lead counsel for opposing parties in patent infringement cases to confer in person or by phone to determine whether a claim construction hearing should be held before the filing of a patent invalidity motion under the U.S. Supreme Court’s Alice decision.