(Podcast) The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
SCOTUS and federal court rulings on TTAB decisions on granting trademarks and trademark renewals; Netflix settling an anticipated defamation case with a disclaimer and donation
Legal Alert: USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
John Harmon on the Evolving Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Intellectual Property
Was the classic song “Over The Rainbow” plagiarized? How about a claim of copyright infringement against the script for “The Holdovers?” AI Legal strategies switch to claims of CMI removal
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions (Podcast)
4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
8 Key Takeaways | The Presumption of Irreparable Harm After the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020
(Podcast) The Briefing: SCOTUS to Determine if USPTO Refusal to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL is Unconstitutional
The Briefing: SCOTUS to Determine if USPTO Refusal to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL is Unconstitutional
USPTO Director Review — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - USPTO Suspends Applications Including Criticisms of Known Living Figures
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: USPTO Suspends Applications Including Criticisms of Known Living Figures
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - USPTO Suspends Action on Trademark Applications Targeting Names of Public Figures
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: USPTO Suspends Action on Trademark Applications Targeting Names of Public Figures
Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Paralegal Insights: A Collaborative Trademark Practice Series 2
On Thursday, June 13, the Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions: FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, No. 23-235: This case involves an attempt to rescind the Food and Drug Administration’s...more
Precedential Opinion Addresses Conclusory Expert Declarations - In a precedential opinion in Xerox Corp. v. Bytemark, Inc., IPR2022-00624, Paper 9 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 24, 2022), the Board denied institution of an inter partes...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
Is the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) constitutional? This was a question asked by Mobility Workx in Mobility Workx, LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, 2021-1441, 2021 WL 4762265 (Fed. Cir. 2021). Mobility Workx raised...more
On October 13, in Mobility Workx v. Unified Patents, LLC, the Federal Circuit rejected a series of due process challenges to the structure of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), leaving the PTAB to continue with...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
In Mobility Workx, LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, the Federal Circuit in a split decision concluded that Mobility Workx, LLC’s constitutional challenges to structure and funding of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) are...more
MOBILITY WORKX, LLC v. UNIFIED PATENTS, LLC Before Newman, Schall, and Dyk. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Fee-funded structure of AIA review proceedings does not violate due process....more
From the beginning of AIA proceedings, Petitioners that have lost at institution decision phase have tried using Mandamus to circumvent the statutory lack of appeal from institution decisions. Mylan Laboratories Ltd. v....more
Ever since institution of the post-grant review proceedings enacted under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act were implemented by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (through the newly constituted Patent Trial and Appeal...more
Security People lost an inter partes review (IPR) and appealed to the Federal Circuit. It lost that appeal and was denied certiorari at the Supreme Court. Security People never raised constitutional arguments in any of these...more
Smith & Nephew and the United States filed their reply briefs on January 22. In its reply brief, the United States rebuts many of the positions taken by Arthrex in its initial merits brief. While Smith & Nephew, in its reply,...more
[co-author: Kathleen Wills] Last year, the global COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for American courts. By making several changes, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was able to...more
In an appeal from the Northern District of California, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Security People’s Administrative Procedure Act (APA) suit challenging the constitutionality of inter partes...more
2019 was another milestone year in intellectual property law that resulted in hundreds of decisions by the courts and Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that will affect your company’s litigation, patent prosecution or...more
There is a popular vintage Harley Davidson t-shirt that says “Tough Guys Finish First.” That may be true. But, sometimes, to finish first, one does not need more tough guys; one needs more lawyers, as a crime-related matter...more
The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more
In 2012, Congress created a new procedure that allows the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to conduct a litigation-like procedure to review and potentially cancel patents. This procedure - inter partes review (“IPR”) - has...more
In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, the Supreme Court rejected constitutional challenges to the America Invents Act’s inter partes review process. The court held that inter partes review (IPR)...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions today: Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, No. 16-712: The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, 35 U.S.C. §100 et seq., went into effect...more
This morning, the United States Supreme Court issued two key decisions concerning the fundamental authority of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to institute inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. ...more
The U.S. Constitution guarantees due process before a person can be deprived of life, liberty, or property. The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) enforces the due process protection in the USPTO and Board proceedings. Under...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights Newsletter is designed to be a valuable resource for all stakeholders in the global patent arena throughout the patent life cycle. To that end, articles will provide perspectives from both...more
In a 38 page decision with a 19 page dissent by Judge Newman, the Federal Circuit determined that Regeneron’s transgenic mouse patent is unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. The decision was rendered in Regeneron...more