BP PLC has settled a $146 million suit in Texas federal court that accused the oil and gas giant of stealing a Florida man's proprietary design for a containment system allegedly used to stem the torrential subsea oil spill caused by the Deepwater Horizon disaster.
Pfizer Inc. and Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. urged a New Jersey federal judge on Friday to toss indirect purchasers' antitrust suit in multidistrict litigation challenging a purportedly anti-competitive patent infringement settlement between the companies over Lipitor, saying the claims were doomed after a similar direct purchaser action was recently dismissed.
The group of American Indians who won the ruling earlier this year canceling the Washington Redskins trademark registrations urged a Virginia federal judge Monday to toss the team's appeal of the decision, saying the case was filed against the wrong defendants in the wrong court.
A federal judge on Friday refused to reduce the $2 million in sanctions imposed on Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. for disclosing confidential information during the Apple Inc. smartphone patent case, saying they hadn't shown the award was excessive.
Holland & Knight LLP on Monday announced that its Tampa office has welcomed new partner Jason H. Baruch, who specializes in commercial litigation, maritime law, bankruptcy and intellectual property work.
The owner of pornography streaming site FyreTV on Monday filed for an injunction against Amazon.com Inc. that seeks to block the online retailer from continuing to use the allegedly trademark infringing name Fire TV to market its own video streaming service.
A Texas federal judge on Thursday approved a settlement between consulting giant Accenture LLP and software maker Wellogix Inc. in a dispute over whether Accenture should be required to pay another $22 million in attorneys’ fees on top of a now-affirmed $44.4 million trade secrets theft verdict.
Raytheon Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. agreed in Arizona federal court on Friday to settle a long-running trademark dispute over the use of the term “paveway” for laser-guided bombs, agreeing that Raytheon owns the mark while granting Lockheed license to use it.
Freescale Semiconductor Inc. and MediaTek Inc. have reached an undisclosed global settlement in their ongoing chip-patent infringement war, the companies announced Monday just as a California federal jury was to begin deliberating in MediaTek's $23.4 million trial accusing rival Freescale of copying three patents.
A California federal judge on Friday trimmed patent holder Signal IP Inc.’s infringement suit against Mercedes-Benz USA LLC accusing the automaker's cars of using its car-safety patents, including one for a blind-spot radar, ruling Signal had not properly alleged willful infringement.
In Law360's latest roundup of new actions at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, a distillery tries to cancel a Twentieth Century Fox trademark for the movie "Sideways," the company behind James Bond is "stirred" to action, and Quaker Oats goes after a real-life woman who calls herself "Aunt Jemima."
The full Federal Circuit decided Friday not to review the so-called mandate rule requiring lower courts to strictly comply with appeals court decisions, rejecting Becton Dickinson and Co.'s argument that the rule was misapplied when the court refused to reduce a $5 million patent verdict against it.
A California federal judge denied SanDisk Corp.’s bid to toss a putative class action lodged by retailers and customers accusing the company of using its patents to monopolize the flash memory industry, ruling the plaintiffs have standing.
It will be much more difficult for patent owners to secure massive verdicts now that the Federal Circuit has thrown out a $368 million damages award against Apple Inc., attorneys say, since the court sent a clear message that damages estimates must be closely tied to the patented features.
Russian gas giant OAO Gazprom said Friday that a $1.3 billion trade secrets suit being pursued by Moncrief Oil International Inc. belongs in Texas federal court because the dispute is subject to a foreign arbitration agreement governing a failed Siberian gas field deal.
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. may be nearing the end of a patent row with Cipla USA Inc. over Cipla’s plans to make a generic version of the antiretroviral drug Sustiva, according to a letter filed on Thursday in New Jersey federal court.
The estate of writer Arthur Conan Doyle took its copyright dispute over the Sherlock Holmes stories to the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, arguing that the editor of a new anthology of tales inspired by the detective should have been forced to cough up the work in question.
LinkedIn Corp. on Thursday called for a California federal judge to throw out the remainder of a putative class action alleging the social media network broke into users’ accounts to send emails on their behalf, saying the plaintiffs’ amended complaint fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted.
An Illinois packaging manufacturer on Thursday accused Frito-Lay Inc. of using its proprietary designs for flexible, resealable plastic cubes and passing them off as Frito-Lay’s own, hitting the snack food giant with a federal trade secrets misappropriation suit.
A Florida federal judge on Thursday ordered a former nightclub owner to hand over documents in a trademark infringement lawsuit that pornographic film company Vivid Entertainment Group filed against him over his use of the mark “Vivid” in the name and promotion of his club.
While the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Purple Book has been colloquially referred to as an “Orange Book equivalent,” the two contain distinct types of information — their differences reflect the unique nature of biologics and the 351(k) approval process, say attorneys at K&L Gates LLP.
Nothing makes an in-house counsel feel like they are being nickeled-and-dimed more than receiving a $3.50, stand-alone invoice. Forcing anyone to spend time on a $3.50 invoice is, quite frankly, just not cool, says Francis Drelling, in-house counsel at Specialty Restaurants Corp.
Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions that have applied the broadest reasonable interpretation standard should be analyzed before Congress passes legislation to require a different claim construction standard. A study is necessary to determine whether and how a different claim construction standard would have made any difference in the decisions, says Eric Cohen of Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP.
The Fourth Circuit's ruling in McAirlands Inc. v. Kimberly-Clark Corp. highlights the intersection of patent and trade dress protection — while utility patents provide inventors a limited monopoly over functional aspects of a product, trade dress affords potentially perpetual protection for nonfunctional designs that associate a product with a manufacturer or source, say attorneys at Arent Fox LLP.
As with the wildly popular inter partes review, post-grant review offers the ability to challenge issued patents in a trial-like procedure before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and obtain a final written decision within about 18 months. But there are some important differences between the processes, says Jeff Vockrodt of Hunton & Williams LLP.
While marketing departments rapidly have embraced social media advertising, legal departments are cautious in giving them the green light. Trying to keep your company’s marketing timely and clever, while also making sure it is legal, can be a juggling act for many, say Erin Hickey and Nancy Ly of Fish & Richardson PC.
Following the U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Octane Fitness and Highmark, brands may find it easier to get exceptional-case fees and costs from generics. Generics — already struggling at the margin to maximize their litigation budgets — need to get a firm grip on this development so that they can avoid paying these fees, and maybe even turn the tables on their adversaries, says Jeffrey Hovden of Robins Kaplan Miller & Ciresi LLP.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank is important to software startups because it goes to the very core of the value that they deliver to the market, says Robert Sachs of Fenwick & West.
Section 102 is perhaps the most important provision of the America Invents Act — but, not surprisingly, it is not a model of plain English. I attempted to rewrite it in simpler, shorter language for easier understanding, says Paul Morgan, former assistant chief patent counsel at Xerox Corp.
Since the U.S. Supreme Court issued Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments Inc. and adopted the new “reasonable certainty” standard for finding patent claim terms indefinite, courts have found the vast majority of claim terms to be sufficiently definite — whether viewed on a case-by-case or term-by-term basis, the vast majority of indefiniteness challenges have failed, say attorneys at Hiscock & Barclay LLP.