In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Jack Daniels Properties Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, 599 U.S. 140 (2023), the Ninth Circuit reversed its earlier decision affirming that a publication called Punchbowl News did not...more
The Supreme Court recently held Abitron Austria GmbH not liable for using Hetronic International, Inc.’s trademarks outside of the United States. Reversing the Tenth Circuit and resolving a circuit split, the Court held that...more
Yesterday, the Supreme Court held 7-2 that a specific use of Andy Warhol’s “Orange Prince” silk screen—based on a copyrighted photograph of Prince—was not fair use. In doing so the Court focused not solely on the...more
On November 4, 2022, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Amgen v. Sanofi, No. 21-757, to review “[w]hether enablement is governed by the statutory requirement that the specification teach those skilled in the art to make...more
The U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion on April 21 addressing the regulation of “off-premises” signs, holding that such regulations are not subject to strict scrutiny under the First Amendment.
City of Austin v. Reagan...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently granted a petition for writ of certiorari to review the extent to which a work of art is a “transformative” fair use under the Copyright Act. The Court will review a Second Circuit decision...more
The Supreme Court held that lack of knowledge of either fact or law can excuse inaccuracies in a copyright registration under Section 411(b)’s safe harbor provision of the Copyright Act....more
The Supreme Court upheld assignor estoppel in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., et al. but held that the Federal Circuit “failed to recognize the doctrine’s proper limits.” In doing so, the Court imposed new...more
The Supreme Court held this week that the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (“USPTO”) appointment of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) judges cannot be constitutionally enforced because the USPTO director does...more
Last Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Minerva Surgical v. Hologic, thereby agreeing to resolve a long-running debate on patent law’s doctrine of assignor estoppel. Minerva Surgical has asked the Court to...more
Are PTAB judges constitutional? This week the Supreme Court granted certiorari to answer this question.
In Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew, the Federal Circuit considered whether the appointment of administrative patent judges...more
10/16/2020
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appeals ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Certiorari ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Officers of the United States ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
SCOTUS ,
Severability Doctrine
Today, the Supreme Court held in U.S. Patent & Trademark Office v. Booking.com B.V. that a generic term paired with an internet designation such as “.com” (called a “generic.com” term by the Court) may be eligible for federal...more
7/1/2020
/ Acquired Distinctiveness ,
Appeals ,
Booking.com ,
Domain Name Registration ,
Domain Names ,
Generic Marks ,
Lanham Act ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
United States Patent and Trademark Office v Booking.com BV ,
USPTO
Today, a unanimous Supreme Court held in Lucky Brand Dungarees, Inc. v. Marcel Fashions Group., Inc. that claim preclusion did not prevent Lucky Brand from asserting a defense it failed to fully litigate in a prior lawsuit...more
5/15/2020
/ Claim Preclusion ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Counterclaims ,
Defense Preclusion ,
Fashion Branding ,
Issue Preclusion ,
Lucky Brand Dungarees v Marcel Fashion Group ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Release Agreements ,
Res Judicata ,
SCOTUS ,
Split of Authority ,
Subsequent Litigation ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks
Yesterday, in Thryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies LP, the Supreme Court held that Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decisions regarding the time limit for filing inter partes reviews (“IPRs”) are not subject to...more
4/24/2020
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
§314(a) ,
§314(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Vacated
The Supreme Court unanimously held that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) may not recover the salaries of its legal personnel as “expenses” in a civil action challenging an adverse decision by the PTO under...more
12/13/2019
/ American Rule ,
Attorney's Fees ,
Civil Claims ,
Fee-Shifting ,
Litigation Fees & Costs ,
Patent Act ,
Patent Applicants ,
Peter v NantKwest Inc ,
Prevailing Party ,
Remedies ,
SCOTUS ,
Section 145 ,
Summary Judgment ,
USPTO
The Supreme Court of the United States recently granted certiorari in two trademark cases. In Romag Fasteners v. Fossil, the Court will consider whether courts can order trademark infringers to disgorge their profits without...more
7/8/2019
/ Appeals ,
Calculation of Damages ,
Certiorari ,
Claim Preclusion ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Fashion Design ,
Lanham Act ,
Res Judicata ,
Romag Fasteners v Fossil ,
SCOTUS ,
Split of Authority ,
Trademark Infringement ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks ,
Willful Infringement
The Supreme Court held Monday that the Lanham Act’s bar on “immoral or scandalous” trademarks is unconstitutional under the First Amendment. Delivering the 6-3 opinion of the Court, Justice Kagan relied on the Court’s...more
6/25/2019
/ Appeals ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
Iancu v. Brunetti ,
Lanham Act ,
Reaffirmation ,
Reversal ,
Scandalous/Immoral Marks ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO ,
Viewpoint Discrimination
The U.S. Supreme Court recently held in Mission Product Holdings v. Tempnology that a trademark licensor cannot revoke the right of a licensee to use a trademark by terminating a license agreement in bankruptcy. Mission...more
5/24/2019
/ Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) ,
Bankruptcy Code ,
Breach of Contract ,
Commercial Bankruptcy ,
Debtors ,
Exclusions ,
Executory Contracts ,
IP License ,
Mission Product Holdings Inc v Tempnology LLC ,
Rescission ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Section 365 ,
Split of Authority ,
Trademark Licenses ,
Trademarks ,
Trustees
Earlier this week, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral argument in Iancu v. Brunetti regarding the constitutionality of the portion of Lanham Act, Section 2(a) (15 U.S.C. § 1052(a)) that prohibits the United...more
4/18/2019
/ Appeals ,
Certiorari ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Disparagement ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
Iancu v. Brunetti ,
Lanham Act ,
Matal v Tam ,
Scandalous/Immoral Marks ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO ,
Vulgar or Offensive Marks
Today, March 4, 2019 the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Rimini Street v. Oracle USA that “full costs” described in 17 U.S.C. § 505 of the (Copyright Act) are limited to the six categories of taxable costs set...more
3/5/2019
/ Copyright ,
Copyright Infringement ,
Copyright Litigation ,
Judicial Discretion ,
Litigation Fees & Costs ,
Prevailing Party ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Rimini Street Inc v Oracle USA Inc ,
SCOTUS ,
Split of Authority ,
The Copyright Act
On Friday, the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear a case that will decide whether the federal ban on trademark protection for “scandalous” material is unconstitutional. In re Brunetti follows the U.S. Patent...more
1/9/2019
/ Appeals ,
Certiorari ,
Disparagement ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
Iancu v. Brunetti ,
Lanham Act ,
Matal v Tam ,
Scandalous/Immoral Marks ,
SCOTUS ,
Trademark Registration ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO ,
Vulgar or Offensive Marks
On September 27, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in Oracle USA v. Rimini Street to resolve a split among the United States Circuit Courts of Appeals concerning costs awarded to a prevailing...more
In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States has opened the door for patent owners to recover lost foreign profits under §§ 284 and 271(f)(2) of the Patent Act. Although the Court’s decision in WesternGeco LLC v....more
6/26/2018
/ 35 U.S.C. § 271(f)(2) ,
35 U.S.C. § 284 ,
Appeals ,
Damages ,
Domestic Injury ,
Extraterritoriality Rules ,
Foreign Sales ,
Lost Profits ,
Patent Act ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
Vacated ,
WesternGeco LLC v Ion Geophysical Corporation
On April 24, 2018, in SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu, the Supreme Court held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) must decide the validity of every patent claim challenged when it undertakes inter partes review under...more
In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, the United States Supreme Court held today, in a 7-2 decision, that the inter partes review process under the America Invents Act (AIA), 35 U.S.C. § 100 et...more
4/25/2018
/ Administrative Proceedings ,
America Invents Act ,
Article III ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Covered Business Method Proceedings ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Oil States Energy Services v Greene's Energy Group ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Private Property ,
Public Property ,
Right to a Jury ,
SCOTUS ,
Seventh Amendment ,
USPTO