Headquartered within steps of the USPTO with an affiliate office in Tokyo, Oblon is one of the largest law firms in the United States focused exclusively on intellectual property law.
1968
Norman Oblon with Stanley Fisher and Marvin Spivak launched what was to become Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, LLP, one of the nation's leading full-service intellectual property law firms.
Outside the US, we service companies based in Japan, France, Germany, Italy, Saudi Arabia, and farther corners of the world. Our culturally aware attorneys speak many languages, including Japanese, French, German, Mandarin, Korean, Russian, Arabic, Farsi, Chinese.
Oblon's professionals provide industry-leading IP legal services to many of the world's most admired innovators and brands.
From the minute you walk through our doors, you'll become a valuable part of a team that fosters a culture of innovation, client service and collegiality.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued final rules implementing the inventor's oath or declaration provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA) on August 14, 2012.
Les Nouvelles - Licensing Executives Society International (LESI)
May 20, 2025 at 13:00 JST, Tokyo Japan
Laches is a judicially-created equitable defense (grounded upon a plaintiff’s unreasonable, prejudicial delay in bringing a claim) for which the legislature has provided no fixed time limitation by which a plaintiff must commence a lawsuit. A statute of limitations is a time fixed by the legislature for filing suit, after which the claim is barred. Can these two defenses, laches and the statute of limitations, co-exist for claims brought under the Copyright Act? In Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc.(Appeal No. 12-1315, May 19, 2014), the Supreme Court held that the Copyright Act’s three-year statute of limitations, 17 U.S.C. § 507(b), controls regarding the timeliness of a claim for copyright damages. Laches still has a roll to play when the plaintiff seeks equitable remedies such as an injunction or a disgorgement of the defendant’s profits.