In This Issue:

- I. U.S. Supreme Court

- A. Trademarks 3

- II. U.S. Courts of Appeal

- A. Patents

- B. Copyrights

- C. Copyrights/Criminal

- D. Trademarks

- E. Trademarks/Unfair Trade Practices

- F. Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA)

- G. Trade Secrets/Misappropriation

- III. U.S. District Courts

- A. Patents

- B. Patents/Antitrust

- C. Copyrights

- D. Copyright/Criminal

- E. Trademarks 8

- F. Trademark/Cybersquatting

- G. Trademarks/Rights of Publicity

- H. Lanham Act/False Advertising

- I. Trade Secrets

- J. Trade Secrets/Criminal

- IV. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

- A. Trademark

- V. State Courts

- A. Massachusetts

- VI. State Legislation

- A. Michigan

- Excerpt from U.S. SUPREME COURT:

Patents -

As reported at 86 BNA’s PTCJ 118, on May 13, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that seeds harvested from one crop are “additional copies” of Monsanto Co.’s patented invention and thus are not subject to the patent exhaustion doctrine. The decision represents a victory for Monsanto, whose patents on Roundup Ready transgenic seeds have withstood attacks from farmers for more than a decade. Bowman v. Monsanto.

Copyrights -

As reported at 85 BNA’s PTCJ 695, on March 19, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 6-3 ruling held that the first sale doctrine, as codified in the federal copyright statute, applies to copies of works legally made overseas and imported into the United States without the permission of the copyright holder. Kirtsaeng d/b/a Bluechristine 99 v. John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Please see full publication below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.