Latest Publications

Share:

The California Supreme Court (and Court of Appeal) - January 30 - February 3, 2023

The California Supreme Court issued the following decision earlier this week: Travis et al. v. Brand et al., Case No. S268480: Government Code section 91003(a) gives trial courts discretion to award attorney’s fees to “a...more

The California Supreme Court (and Court of Appeal) - November 14-18, 2022

The California Supreme Court issued the following decision last week: Yahoo, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA, No. S253593. Yahoo!’s insurer, National Union, refused to indemnify Yahoo! in...more

The California Supreme Court (and Court of Appeal) - October 17-21, 2022

​​​​​​​The California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District issued the following decisions this week: Golf & Tennis Pro Shop, Inc. v. The Superior Court of Orange County, No. G060852: The Court of Appeal...more

The California Supreme Court (and Court of Appeals) - September 6 - 9, 2022

The California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3, issued the following decision on September 7: Garg v. Garg, Case No. G061500:  This decision serves, perhaps, as both a warning and a consolation to attorneys...more

The California Supreme Court (and Court of Appeals) - August 29 - September 2, 2022

The California Supreme Court issued the following decisions last week: Hoffmann v. Young, et al., Case No. S266003: Under Civil Code section 846, landowners generally owe no duty of care to keep their property safe for...more

The California Supreme Court (and Court of Appeal) - August 21-26, 2022

The California Supreme Court issued the following decisions: Cam-Carson, LLC v. Carson Reclamation Authority, et al., Case No. B312729: Plaintiff, a commercial real estate developer joint venture, sued the City of Carson...more

The California Supreme Court (and Court of Appeal) - August 15-19, 2022

The California Supreme Court issued the following decisions this week: Coast Community College Dist. v. Commission on State Mandates, No. S262663: The Supreme Court addressed whether several community college districts...more

The California Supreme Court (and Court of Appeal) - August 12, 2022

The California Supreme Court issued the following decision on Thursday: Zolly v. City of Oakland, No. S262634: In a case involving the California Constitution’s taxpayer approval requirements for local taxes, the...more

The California Supreme Court (and Court of Appeal) - August 5, 2022

The California Supreme Court issued the following decisions: County of Butte v. Department of Water Resources, et al., No. S258574: California’s Department of Water Resources (DWR) operates the “Oroville Facilities,” an...more

The California Supreme Court (and Court of Appeal) - August 2, 2022

We are spotlighting a published California Court of Appeal decision on rehearing for its analysis on contract and fraud claims arising out of a real estate transaction. The California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate...more

The California Supreme Court - July 22, 2022

Siry Investment, L.P. v. Farkhondehpour, No. S262081: The Supreme Court resolved two issues: whether (1) a party in default has standing to file a motion for a new trial alleging legal error in the calculation of damages, and...more

The California Supreme Court (and Court of Appeal) - July 15, 2022

While not from the California Supreme Court, we are reporting on a decision from the California Court of Appeal because of its importance to myriad COVID-19 insurance coverage actions currently being litigated in California. ...more

The CA Supreme Court - July 1, 2022

Grande v. Eisenhower Medical Center, No. S261247: In this case, a staffing agency arranged for a nurse to work at a hospital. The nurse sued the staffing agency for violating the Labor Code and Unfair Competition Law but did...more

“All the Way Up” to the Second Circuit

Fly Havana and Fat Joe are heading “All the Way Up” to the Second Circuit for “Another Round.” Earlier this month Fly Havana appealed New York District Court Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald’s conclusion that Fly Havana had...more

From Pocket to Wrist: Decision for Vortic Affirmed on Appeal

We have previously written about the trademark dispute between Vortic - a watchmaker that restores antique pocket watches, and converts them into wrist watches - and the venerated Hamilton Watch Company, which produced its...more

That’s Still a KOOL Mark, BLOOM - KOOL Cigarettes Smokes Out the Interlocking OOs in BLOOM Cannabis Products

Like me, Judge Otis D. Wright of the Central District of California remembers KOOL. A once leading menthol cigarette label, KOOL brands and its owner ITG Brands, LLC sued Capna Intellectual claiming Capna’s Bloom Brands’ use...more

To Kalon: Trademark or Geographical Description

The Northern District of California concluded last week that Constellation Brands has the exclusive right to use the TO KALON and TO KALON VINEYARD marks on wine, and that The Vineyard House, LLC (TVH) “cannot use the term in...more

“Zone of Expansion”: A Lesson in Federal Trademark Protection For Unlawful Products?

Now we wait. The final brief was submitted this past week in connection with an interlocutory appeal to the second circuit of the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction over use of the WOODSTOCK mark. Potentially...more

From Pocket to Wrist: It’s Time to Watch Hamilton and Vortic

I used to love pocket watches. My Wyatt Earp Halloween costume was not complete until I had a gold pocket watch hanging from my black vest. It’s no surprise then that reading the court’s decision on a motion for summary...more

Fully Booked: The Fourth Circuit Confirms Booking.com is Protectable But Company Must Pay the USPTO’s Fees on Appeal

Dorsey’s TMCA team has thoroughly covered the history of the dispute between the USPTO and Booking.com B.V., which started when the Trademark Trial and Appeals Board rejected the BOOKING.COM trademark as generic (covered...more

9th Circuit Resurrects King Solomon’s Claim to “Empire”

In three separate opinions, a panel of the Ninth Circuit revived a pro se plaintiff’s claim that defendants’ television series “Empire” infringed upon his copyrighted “treatment” for a television series entitled “King...more

To EatRight, It May be Too Late

The Ninth Circuit breathed new life, for now, into a trademark infringement suit brought by Eat Right Foods Ltd.’s (“ERF”) against Whole Foods Market, Inc. The district court had granted summary judgment for Whole Foods after...more

The Broad Umbrella Covering Joint Authors Also Protects Collaborators

A recent decision from the federal court of the Southern District of New York serves as a reminder of the broad rights enjoyed by a joint author under the Copyright Act, including the right to create and license derivative...more

The Five Year Divide: Limited Recourse to Cancel Registrations, Even Those Void Ab Initio

The Sixth Circuit recently issued an opinion in NetJets Inc. v. IntelliJet Group, LLC Inc. (unpublished), holding that where a trademark registration is incontestable, it may not be cancelled on the ground that it was void ab...more

New Questions Raised by Judge Rakoff: Misuse of the ® Symbol and Literal Falsity Examined

Judge Rakoff is back at it in Classic Liquor Importers, Ltd. v. Spirits International, B.V. We previously blogged about the dangers inherent in sending a cease and desist letter without the concurrent appetite for...more

28 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide