The proposed regulations provide important clarity on the distinction between substantial and superficial modification for purposes of determining eligible components produced by the taxpayer, along with guidance as to...more
The California Court of Appeal in Mega RV Corp. v. HWH Corp. (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 1318 held that component-part manufacturers are not obligated to indemnify retail sellers under California Code of Civil Procedure section...more
Massachusetts federal and state courts issued several important product liability decisions in 2021. Nutter’s Product Liability practice group reviewed these cases and report on their significant holdings as follows...more
We recently covered the United States Supreme Court’s troubling decision in Ford Motor Company v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court, 141 S. Ct. 1017 (2021), which has broadened the reach of specific personal jurisdiction...more
Aligning with neighboring New York, and clearing up conflict within the Appellate Division, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled equipment manufacturers can be held strictly liable on the basis of failure to warn for...more
On April 3, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) posted a notice that it has created a special email address in order to assist importers who are experiencing delays bringing COVID-19-related supplies into the...more
The patent marking statute, codified at 35 U.S.C. § 287(a) appears straightforward: Patentees, and persons making, offering for sale, or selling within the United States any patented article for or under them, or importing...more
Exporters and US importers of goods claiming Vietnamese origin face increasing risk. President Trump recently indicated his administration will pay close attention to goods exported from Vietnam, including those suspected of...more
A New Jersey federal judge recently applied Tennessee and California law in dismissing a proposed class action concerning allegedly leaky water heater sensors/valves (valves) made by Honeywell International Inc. The decision...more
When it comes to proving use of marks in commerce, perception by consumers is everything. If consumers perceive a mark as identifying only a particular component or feature of the goods in a specimen, the PTO will likely...more
The September 2019 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter discusses a component mark case study, LeBron James' recent trademark application, and the current gTLD sunrise period. In this issue: -...more
Despite a volatile, uncertain trade environment, you can take steps to protect your US market share - One year into the US-China trade war, after several waves of unprecedented punitive US tariffs on US$250 billion worth...more
Design patents–why now? We are in 2019. Aesthetics matter. Products that look good sell better. Hardware companies are investing increasing amounts of resources into design teams that create sleek and modern products that...more
Colleagues and clients frequently pose the question whether after more than forty years the asbestos litigation juggernaut has finally neared its inevitable conclusion. The United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in...more
On March 19, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court in Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries held that, under maritime law, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn of asbestos or other hazardous parts when its own product, although...more
The United Kingdom (UK) leaving the European Union (EU) will inevitably result in difficulties for businesses using UK content in their products for export under EU Free Trade Agreements, or for UK businesses using EU content...more
In an eagerly anticipated decision by the asbestos bar, the United States Supreme Court in Air & Liquid Systems et al. v. DeVries et at., Dkt. No. 17-1104, 2019 WL 1245520 (March 19, 2019) rejected the “bare metal defense” as...more
In Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. et al. v. DeVries et al., No. 17-1104 (March 19, 2019), the U.S. Supreme Court held that under federal maritime law, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn when its product requires the...more
On March 19, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries, affirming the ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in this maritime tort case involving the availability of...more
On March 19, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the first case involving maritime law in several years. In Air & Liquid Systems Corp. et al v. Devries, et al, 586 US ___ (2019), Justice Kavanaugh, writing for the majority...more
In its decision Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court held, under maritime law, that manufacturers can be held liable for injuries caused by asbestos-containing parts manufactured and added to their products by third parties. The...more
On March 19, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. DeVries, No. 17-1104, holding that in the maritime tort context, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn when: 1) its product requires incorporation...more
On September 11, 2018, Cozen O’Connor’s Product Liability Prevention and Defense (“PLPD”) blog provided a quick reference guide that manufacturers can consult to MAN UP on defenses when hit with a claim under Chapter 82 in...more
The Supreme Court recently answered the question whether a patent owner can collect damages caused by an infringer’s sales outside the U.S. Federal law typically reaches only conduct within the country, but the justices made...more
Determining Whether a Claim Element or Combination of Elements Would Have Been Well-Understood, Routine, and Conventional Is a Question of Fact - In Aatrix Software, Inc. v. Green Shades Software, Inc., Appeal No....more