(Podcast) The Briefing: Does This Court’s Ruling Put an End to Tattoo Copyright Cases?
The Briefing: Does This Court’s Ruling Put an End to Tattoo Copyright Cases?
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 31: Trade Secrets and Protecting Confidential Information with Jennie Cluverius of Maynard Nexsen
4 Key Takeaways | Trade Secret Update 2024 Legal Developments and Trends
The Briefing – Late Night, Early Dismissal: The Santos-Kimmel Copyright Case
(Podcast) The Briefing – Late Night, Early Dismissal: The Santos-Kimmel Copyright Case
(Podcast) The Briefing: Deep Dive into the NO FAKES Act
The Briefing: Deep Dive into the NO FAKES Act
(Podcast) The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
Intellectual property considerations for launching new cannabis products
The Briefing: Affiliate Marketing vs Retail Services - TTAB's Landmark Ruling
Johnson Case’s Potential Impact on Colleges, NIL, and College Athletics — Highway to NIL
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
The Briefing: How to Avoid Bearing The Risks of A Naked License (Featured Podcast)
The Briefing: How to Avoid Bearing The Risks of A Naked License (Featured)
The Briefing: IOC Goes For Gold In Trademark Suit Over Logan Paul - Kevin Durant Sports Drink
The Briefing: IOC Goes For Gold In Trademark Suit Over Logan Paul - Kevin Durant Sports Drink (Podcast)
JONES DAY PRESENTS®: Employer Options in a Non-Noncompete World
The latest on: NFL Anti-Trust decision; Record Labels Sue Over Generative AI; Copyright Office clarifies Termination Rights, Royalties, Transfers, Disputes, and the MMA.
United States Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron (S.D.N.Y.) recently granted a motion by Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (collectively “Samsung”) to compel non-party Microchip Technology...more
On August 22, 2024, Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein (S.D.N.Y.) denied Google LLC’s motion for summary judgment that (1) it has not infringed two asserted patents; and (2) the two patents are invalid for lack of written...more
In a recent decision, the PTAB determined that images of products offered for sale via online retailers, such as Amazon, did not alone qualify as printed publications—even if the images showed the product and the date it was...more
The world of intellectual property (IP) underwent some significant transformations this summer, with recent changes from the U.S. Federal Circuit and the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) reshaping the landscape of...more
Fiskars Finland OY AB v. Woodland Tools, Inc., No. 22-cv-00540 (W.D. Wis. Aug. 26, 2024) - On August 26, 2024, the Western District of Wisconsin issued a decision adjudicating a number of motions in a case involving a...more
On December 1, 2023, Intelligent Wellhead Systems, Inc. (“Intelligent”) filed a petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 11,401,779 (“the ’779 Patent”) (“IPR256”), assigned to Downing Wellhead Equipment,...more
Broadband iTV, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., et al., No. 2023-1107 (Fed. Cir. (W.D. Tex.) Sept. 3, 2024). Opinion by Reyna, joined by Dyk and Stark. Broadband iTV sued Amazon for infringement of five patents directed to...more
Specify the Steps of Information Manipulation or Lose under § 101 - In Mobile Acuity Ltd. v. Blippar Ltd. Appeal No. 22-2216, the Federal Circuit held that patent claims that merely recite result-orientated, functional...more
This chart summarizes the case name, presiding judge, drug, and patents-at-issue in all federal district court cases that are filed pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act. It also includes the same information for proceedings...more
Parkervision, Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-1755, 2024-2221 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 6, 2024) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit weighed in again on a 13-year-old patent dispute concerning Qualcomm’s...more
This chart tracks the date, drug, reference-listed company, applicant, and indications of publicly available drug launches resulting from Abbreviated New Drug Applications and 505(b)(2) Applications....more
On July 30, 2024, Director Vidal ordered patent board judges to revisit a ruling on “an obvious typographical error.” See Hesai Technology Co. Ltd., Hesai Group, and Hesai Inc. v. Ouster, Inc., IPR2023-01485. Director Vidal,...more
In 2016, the Federal Circuit expressed doubt that claim constructions from the PTAB could give rise to estoppel in later litigation because “the [PTAB] applies the broadest reasonable construction of the claims while the...more
As we move into the second half of the year, we are alerting you to 11 patent cases that you should look out for during the second half of 2024. This judicial mix touches on a range of industries and interests, such as...more
Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Apple Inc., Nos. 2022-1884, -1886 (Fed. Cir. (W.D. Wis.) Aug. 28, 2024). Opinion by Prost, joined by Taranto and Chen. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) sued Apple for...more
Under 35 U.S.C. § 102, the “on-sale bar” invalidates a patent if an inventor has sold or made the invention publicly available more than one year before filing the patent application. Recently, the United States Court of...more
Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Apple Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-1884, -1886 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 28, 2024) In its only precedential patent decision last week, the Federal Circuit brought to a close a long-running dispute...more
In Sanho Corp. v. Kaijet Technology International Limited, Inc, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s decision finding obvious all challenged claims of the ‘429 patent, which relates to a device that provides ports for...more
This chart summarizes the case name, drug, patents-in-suit, and publicly available terms for reported settlements in federal district court cases that are filed pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act....more
In Natera Inc. v. NeoGenomics Laboratories, Inc. the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court's grant of a preliminary injunction against NeoGenomics in patent infringement litigation involving Natera's U.S. Patent Nos....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed a patent challenger’s appeal in an inter partes review (IPR) because the challenger could not meet the injury-in-fact requirement for Article III standing. Platinum...more
Realtime Adaptive Streaming L.L.C. v. Sling TV, L.L.C., et al., No. 2023-1035 (Fed. Cir. (D. Colo.) Aug. 23, 2024). Opinion by Albright (sitting by designation), joined by Moore and Lourie....more
While the genus antibody claim was effectively killed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Amgen v. Sanofi, it lives on in Europe despite a few recent setbacks at the European Patent Office ("EPO") and the Unified Patent Court...more
In an ongoing patent dispute between manufacturers of armored fiber optic cables, Judge Choudhury (E.D.N.Y.) recently resolved competing motions to dismiss on several grounds. In doing so, she ruled that Defendant Point 2...more
The Federal Circuit recently issued a decision in SoftView LLC v. Apple Inc. clarifying the scope of patent owner estoppel set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3)(i). 2024 WL 3543902 (Fed. Cir. July 26, 2024). The regulation...more