A former chief financial officer of manufacturing company PilePro LLC, who allegedly left the company and made off with its patents, asked a Texas federal judge Monday to disqualify the company’s attorneys, Shumway Van & Hansen, because the firm represented him while he was still an employee.
A California appeals court on Tuesday rejected Amkor’s attempts to overturn a $128.3 million arbitration judgment in favor of Tessera Inc. over a patent licensing agreement, ruling the arbitrators were allowed to award Tessera royalties for Amkor’s use of the technology after the deal was terminated.
A California federal judge on Monday rebuffed a candy importer’s bid to escape a permanent ban on selling Mars Inc. and Nestle SA-produced sweets that The Hershey Co. contends infringe its marks.
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board on Monday approved a settlement between Accord Healthcare Inc. and drugmakers Helsinn Healthcare SA and Roche Palo Alto LLC over a patent on nausea drug Aloxi, ending the second-ever post-grant review proceeding under the America Invents Act.
A Tenth Circuit panel on Tuesday rejected Dish Network Corp.’s attempt to get its insurers to cover its defense against patent infringement claims brought by billionaire investor Ronald A. Katz over an automated Dish telephone system, ruling the policies didn’t cover injuries related to the broadcasting business.
Samsung Electronics was sued for trademark infringement in New York federal court Monday by a multimedia firm called Milk Music, which claims Samsung stole its name for the company’s recently launched Milk Music Internet radio service.
A California federal judge has ruled that two patents on spinal surgery devices asserted against Alphatec Spine Inc. are invalid as indefinite, ruling that although the patents would not be invalid under an older indefiniteness standard, they are under the U.S. Supreme Court's recent Nautilus decision.
The Patent Trial & Appeal Board has issued guidance on how patent owners can amend claims in America Invents Act reviews, opening the door for patent owner PPC Broadband Inc. to make rare amendments in Corning Optical Communications RF LLC’s inter partes review of PPC’s coaxial cable patent.
A Virginia federal judge on Tuesday denied a bid by a group of American Indians to toss a suit brought against them by the Washington Redskins challenging the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's ruling that the team's name is disparaging to Native Americans.
Retailers Sears Holdings Corp. and Big Lots Inc. told an Illinois federal judge on Monday that copyright, fraud and trade secrets claims do not belong in a patent suit accusing the companies of selling knockoff windshield wiper blade connectors, saying the claims have not been adequately pled.
Dell Inc., eBay Inc. and others have thrown their support behind Google Inc.'s bid for the U.S. Supreme Court to consider whether a court can presume a patent claim merits a broad interpretation despite amendments to overcome an earlier rejection, saying a Federal Circuit ruling encourages ambiguous claim amendment language.
A California federal judge ruled Monday that Activision Blizzard Inc.’s use of a trademark-protected military patch in the video game "Call of Duty" was allowed under the First Amendment, finding that multiplayer games are fully protected expression.
Nossaman LLP said Monday that it should remain as counsel in a copyright and trade secrets suit for the former controlling stakeholder and CEO of its onetime client — now the plaintiff in the suit — Tivoli LLC, saying its clients already have more privileged information about Tivoli than the firm itself.
The U.S. and India revived their long-dormant bilateral Trade Policy Forum in New Delhi Tuesday, with each side vowing to enhance their engagement on a slew of policy issues including intellectual property protections, agricultural trade and investment liberalization.
A European Union court ruled Tuesday that the shape of the Rubik’s Cube — one of the best-selling toys of all time — can remain a trademark, rejecting claims that it was too functional for trademark protection.
Rachel Krevans of Morrison & Foerster LLP played a key role in securing jury verdicts of more than $1 billion for Apple Inc. in its patent wars with Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and nabbed victories in other cases before the Federal Circuit, landing a spot among Law360’s Intellectual Property MVPs.
Samsung Electronics Co. on Friday asked the U.S. International Trade Commission to block shipments of products made by graphics chipmaker Nvidia Corp. it says infringe on its memory and data patents, escalating an ongoing patent infringement dispute between the two companies in related ITC and federal court suits.
Suprema Inc. on Friday reiterated its argument that the full Federal Circuit should rule that the U.S. International Trade Commission lacks authority to hear induced patent infringement cases when a product is found to infringe only after importation.
Toshiba Corp. on Friday responded to the International Trade Commission's decision to review an ITC administrative law judge's determination that Toshiba imported products that infringe two digital display patents, saying the ALJ's ruling contained significant errors that “led to a manifest injustice.”
The major television networks urged the Ninth Circuit on Monday to overturn a ruling that said college athletes must be paid for use of their images, calling that concept “fundamentally incompatible with basic freedoms to present events of interest to the public.”
For parties that are litigating in the U.S. International Trade Commission under Section 337, the existence of a co-pending inter partes review proceeding can give rise to competing timelines, and potentially conflicting outcomes, with a variety of strategic consequences, say James Dowd and Jacob Oyloe of WilmerHale.
Unless the recent ruling in the Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP bankruptcy case is overturned on appeal or the New York Legislature amends the state’s fraudulent transfer and partnership laws, partners of New York firms will bear greater risk if their firms fail than will members of many non-New York partnerships. This risk factor might even affect decisions by prospective lateral partners about which firms to join, say attorneys with Arnold & Porter LLP.
Now that the Judicial Conference of the U.S. has unanimously approved abolishment of Rule 84 and Form 18, patent litigants may be only one year away from facing significant changes to how patent infringement is pled. Presumably, the Twombly and Iqbal standards would apply to direct patent infringement complaints, just as they currently apply to indirect infringement claims, say Jason Murata and Ryan Cook of Axinn Veltrop & Harkrider LLP.
Post-grant review may prove to be an important forum for companies that do not want to wait until after filing their biosimilar applications to challenge the validity of relevant patents, say Marsha Gillentine and Rebecca Hammond of Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox PLLC.
A recent District of New Jersey decision in the case of Crumbs Bake Shop Inc. is significant because it further illuminates alternative solutions for key unresolved legal questions regarding the treatment of rejected trademark licenses in bankruptcy. Crumbs also has practical implications for the sale of intellectual property portfolios in bankruptcy cases, say attorneys with Morrison & Foerster LLP.
While the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act's language is silent on vicarious liability, this omission has not precluded some courts from looking beyond the text to apply common law principles of agency or, alternatively, imposing such liability using the CFAA’s conspiracy provision, says Leonard Feiwus of Kasowitz Benson Torres & Friedman LLP.
While observers were focused on the rapid rise of smartphone-related Section 337 litigation and its sudden fall-off after 2011, the number of U.S. International Trade Commission cases involving medical devices has quietly doubled, with almost one case in every 10 featuring a medical device, says Shara L. Aranoff, counsel with Covington & Burling LLP and former chairwoman of the ITC.
Unilever's false advertising lawsuit against Hampton Creek Inc.’s “Just Mayo” trademarked brand of egg-free mayo pits an established food manufacturer with beloved brands in recognized product categories against a new company seeking to redefine or create a new category and implicates important aspects of food and advertising law, including the standards of identity in food labeling, says Christopher Van Gundy of Keller and Heckman LLP.
Parrish v. Latham & Watkins LLP represents no sea change in the law on malicious prosecution since the appellate court relied heavily on Slaney v. Ranger Ins. Co. The Latham court did not create a new exception, it simply followed precedent over 10 years old, say Kyle Kveton and John Fitzgibbons of Robie & Matthai APC.
Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling in Gunn v. Minton, an increasing number of patent issues are being decided in state courts and regional courts of appeal. This trend appears to be at odds with the system envisioned by Congress, and results from apparent misapplications of Gunn, says Mark Cantor of Brooks Kushman PC.