When the U.S. Supreme Court put limits on where patent lawsuits can be filed, it was widely viewed as a blockbuster decision. One year later, the impact of the ruling has met expectations, pushing cases out of the Eastern District of Texas while causing a filing spike in Delaware and other courts.
K&L Gates LLP has expanded its intellectual property practice by snagging a former Jones Day partner with expertise litigating copyright and advertising cases to work in its Washington, D.C., office, the firm announced.
Famed comic book creator Stan Lee hit Pow Entertainment Inc. with a $1 billion fraud suit in California state court Tuesday that claims the company he helped to create profited by stealing his identity, likeness, name and image.
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board on Tuesday upheld a Realtime Data patent covering data compression technology that was challenged by several tech companies including Dell, Oracle and HP, finding the companies failed to show any of the claims are obvious.
Resealable food storage and trash bag maker The Glad Products Co. slapped a competitor with a trademark infringement suit in California federal court Tuesday, accusing it of making similar products with logos and trade dress that rip off Glad’s well-known household brands in an attempt to deceive consumers.
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. urged a California federal court on Tuesday not to sanction the company over its suit alleging Panasonic Corp. colluded with others to monopolize the flash memory card market, arguing Panasonic is glossing over the main part of the alleged scheme.
A New York federal judge on Tuesday refused to dismiss Amsterdam-based fashion retailer Scotch & Soda's trademark infringement suit against fellow apparel maker Scotch & Iron, holding that the latter company took a “strained reading” of the Dutch company’s allegations that their names were confusingly similar.
The Federal Circuit should uphold the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's decision saying that sovereign immunity doesn't apply to inter partes reviews because federal agencies are allowed to enforce federal law, even against states and Native American tribes, the U.S. Department of Justice, Microsoft Corp. and other amici told the court.
Return Mail Inc. has urged the U.S. Supreme Court to review a Federal Circuit ruling that the federal government is a "person" with standing to challenge patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, saying the government has become a "repeat participant" in America Invents Act review proceedings.
A former adjunct law professor asked the Third Circuit on Tuesday to reconsider its decision leaving in place a settlement he reached with Rider University after being accused of plagiarism, which he says was the result of the university suppressing evidence that he had been given permission to use another professor’s syllabus.
The Federal Circuit on Tuesday affirmed a Texas federal judge's finding that InvestPic LLC's patented method for analyzing financial data, which it asserted against SAP America Inc., was invalid under Alice for claiming a noninventive and abstract mathematical idea.
Several generic drug companies have urged the Federal Circuit to uphold the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s finding that it could reevaluate patents for the dry-eye drug Restasis, in spite of Allergan’s decision to transfer its intellectual property to the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe and invoke sovereign immunity to avoid inter partes review.
Google objected Tuesday to an architect’s sixth attempt at alleging the tech giant stole his building design technology trade secrets, saying the amended suit filed in California federal court with bolstered Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act claims was improperly filed without the court’s permission.
A New Jersey federal judge has awarded ZimmerBiomet $13.3 million in attorneys’ fees and more than $500,000 in costs following a long-running polymer-patent dispute with Howmedica that resulted in the invalidation of four of the latter company’s patents, according to court documents unsealed Monday.
The Music Modernization Act, a major copyright bill that’s looking more and more likely to become law, is really a package of small tweaks and amendments. Here’s a breakdown of exactly what’s in the latest version.
Apple told an eight-member jury during opening statements in a high-profile California federal damages trial Tuesday that Samsung owes it more than $1 billion for infringing three of Apple's design patents covering iPhones, while Samsung pegged the number at just $28 million.
Rebuking Eastern District of Texas Judge Rodney Gilstrap, the Federal Circuit ruled Tuesday that when companies are incorporated in states with multiple judicial districts, only one is the proper venue for a patent lawsuit, negating decisions that allowed suits in every district.
Dartmouth College claims the Patent Trial and Appeal Board abused its discretion when it scrapped an earlier ruling and decided to review all of the challenges against the university’s vitamin supplement patent after the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that curbed the board's ability to pick and choose claims to review.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday approved Hospira’s Inc.’s anemia medication Retacrit, a biosimilar of Amgen Inc.’s blockbuster biologic Epogen, bringing the total number of biosimilars approved by the agency to 10.
The Third Circuit has already cleared a group of health plans that paid for the blockbuster cholesterol medication Lipitor to bring antitrust litigation against Pfizer Inc. and Ranbaxy Inc. based on various state laws, so the drugmakers' bid to dismiss the claims is fruitless, the plans told a New Jersey federal court Monday.
A Pennsylvania federal judge paused NASA supplier Advanced Fluid Systems Inc.’s bid to enforce a $3.1 million judgment against rival supplier Livingston & Haven LLC, finding that Livingston had properly requested a stay by securing a letter of credit as security while it seeks a new trial.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued two big patent rulings — upholding a system for challenging patents as constitutional, but finding the Patent Trial and Appeal Board must decide the validity of every challenged claim when it agrees to institute those American Invents Act reviews. Here, Law360 looks at how we got here, what the court ruled, and how these decisions will impact practicing before the PTAB.
After a three-year surge, patent suits at the Federal Circuit leveled off last year as the court showed signs of adjusting to its bustling workload. The judges found time to write more opinions, and they reached greater consensus, penning fewer separate concurrences and dissents than in 2016.
A Supreme Court ruling redrew the patent litigation map. The International Trade Commission became an ever more popular patent venue. District courts saw fewer cases. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board isn’t what it used to be. 2017 was a challenging year for patent attorneys.
An Illinois federal judge's recent decision in Medix Staffing Solutions v. Dumrauf marks a departure from the weight of authority in the state that would traditionally allow development of a factual record before finding a noncompetition covenant overbroad, say Dan Fazio and Shane Blackstone of Winston & Strawn LLP.
In SAS Institute v. Iancu, the U.S. Supreme Court ended the practice that allowed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to institute an inter partes review with respect to fewer than all of the challenged claims. This will cause fundamental changes to IPR practice and increase overall costs of IPR trials, says Michael Fleming, of counsel at Irell & Manella LLP and former chief administrative patent judge of the PTAB.
The U.S. Supreme Court's decision this week in Oil States v. Greene’s settles only the Article III constitutional challenge to inter partes reviews, and one particular paragraph in the majority opinion reads like an invitation for future petitions, say attorneys with Haug Partners LLP.
An Alabama federal court recently ruled that it is per se anti-competitive for the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association to grant licenses to member plans to use trademarks in exclusive geographic markets. If upheld, this decision represents a significant threat to the fundamental structure of the association, says Robert Craig of Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP.
Artificial intelligence is playing a growing role in the product development, marketing and sales strategies of fashion designers and retailers. This revolution brings uncertainty in the areas of trade secret protection, traditional intellectual property rights and privacy law, say William Forni of Calvin Klein, and Ben Quarmby and Daniel Michaeli of MoloLamken LLP.
In the age of e-commerce, counterfeit cosmetics present a growing challenge — not only do they pose significant health risks to consumers, but they raise serious legal concerns for brand manufacturers, distributors and retailers, say Aliza Karetnick and Kelly Bonner of Duane Morris LLP.
In WesternGeco v. Ion, the government and WesternGeco argued that proximate cause and foreseeability should determine the limits of recoverable patent damages, based on congressional intent and statutory language. Nevertheless, the U.S. Supreme Court will likely apply the extraterritoriality framework set forth in the 2016 RJR decision, say Jerry Selinger and Grant Davis of Patterson & Sheridan LLP.
To discharge their ethical obligations to their clients during a mediation, lawyers must not allow mediators to take on inappropriate responsibilities. Lawyers should not sign whatever agreement a mediator puts under their nose, and should conduct as much of the face-to-face settlement negotiations as possible, says Jeff Kichaven, an independent mediator.
Several California appellate courts have recently ruled on conflicts between employers and publishers over the appropriateness of anonymous online posts, including the alleged publication of trade secrets. Now the California Supreme Court is poised to decide Hassell v. Bird, a key case in this free-speech battle, says Michael Weil of Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP.
In light of the Federal Circuit’s decision in Berkheimer v. HP, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has issued a new memorandum regarding subject matter eligibility. Patent practitioners now have a new tool to combat patent-ineligibility challenges, say Michelle Holoubek and Lestin Kenton of Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox PLLC.