News & Analysis as of

Fee-Shifting Lanham Act

Epstein Becker & Green

Punching Bag or Counterpuncher Part II: Recouping Your Fees Under the Lanham Act

Epstein Becker & Green on

Congratulations—you’ve been sued again. This time it’s in federal court under the Lanham Act. You review the complaint, and while it’s not outrageously frivolous on its face (which we previously discussed here), it’s also not...more

Epstein Becker & Green

Punching Bag or Counterpuncher: Responses to a Frivolous Lawsuit

Epstein Becker & Green on

Congratulations. You’ve been sued in court in New Jersey. To make matters worse, the complaint is full of lies. Not distorted versions of the truth or someone’s interpretation of events that actually occurred, but outright...more

Jones Day

U.S. Supreme Court: "All the Expenses" Does Not Include Attorney’s Fees - In Peter v. Nantkwest, Inc., the Supreme Court...

Jones Day on

The U.S. Supreme Court's recent 9-0 decision in Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., Case No. 18-801, informs strategic cost considerations in appeals challenging adverse decisions issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Supreme Court Issues Unanimous Ruling Denying PTO Attorneys’ Fees for Section 145 Actions

On December 11, 2019, in Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., 589 U.S. __ (2019), the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision holding that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) cannot recover the salaries of its legal...more

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

The Katten Kattwalk | Issue 12

The Katten Kattwalk discusses legal issues in the fashion industry affecting the trademarks, patents and copyrights associated with companies, brands and products. ...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Intellectual Property Law - December 2016

Design Patents—Supreme Court Decides Samsung v. Apple - Why it matters: On December 6, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Samsung v. Apple, holding that, for purposes of a "total profits" damages award for infringement of a...more

WilmerHale

Copyright and Trademark Case Review: Who’s on First?, Virtual Lockers and Lanham Act Fee-Shifting

WilmerHale on

Copyright Opinions - Second Circuit Permits Distribution of Cloud-Based Samples, But Declines to Consider “Novel” Cloud Storage Infringement Issue: Smith v. Barnesandnoble.com, LLC, No. 15-3508 (2d Cir. October 6,...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The 9th Circuit Injects Some “Octane” into the Lanham Act Attorneys’ Fee Provision

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

In the immortal words of the most recent Nobel Laureate in literature, “the times they are a changin.’” Section 35(a) of the Lanham Act provides that “[t]he court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney fees to...more

Dentons

Attorneys' Fees May be Easier to Obtain in Lanham Act Cases Post-Octane Fitness

Dentons on

Intellectual property litigation is expensive for both the plaintiff and defendant. However, because defendants are required to defend themselves in a lawsuit—in comparison to a plaintiff who has the choice to file and...more

Knobbe Martens

Trademark Review | May 2015

Knobbe Martens on

Attorneys’ Fees Might be More Readily Granted in Trademark Cases - Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court relaxed the standard for awarding attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party in patent infringement cases. Octane...more

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

The Katten Kattwalk - Issue 06

In this issue: - “Google It”: The Search Engine’s Trademark May Be a Verb, But It’s Not Generic - You Say “Tom‘ah’to,” I Say “Tom‘ay’to”: Determining the Correct Pronunciation of Uniquely Coined Trademarks ...more

11 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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