JONES DAY TALKS®: Collective Actions in Spain: A Look Around and the View Ahead
JONES DAY TALKS®: Class Actions Worldview Guide: Part 1–The United States and European Union
Life Sciences Quarterly: A View From Washington: What to Expect From the SEC
Recognition of Foreign Judgments in the United States (VIDEO)
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently published new guidance on subject-matter eligibility as related to Artificial Intelligence (AI), opening a written comment window to respond with a deadline of...more
Some courts had previously interpreted Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act to allow for either a stay of the action or dismissal. Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Smith v. Spizzirri, once arbitration is...more
Does federal trademark law reach conduct outside of the United States? The Supreme Court addressed this question recently in Abitron Austria v. Hetronic International, Inc., which prompted us to revisit a related issue we...more
The US Supreme Court has opened the door for foreign plaintiffs to sue under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). RICO is a powerful statute that allows recovery of treble damages and attorneys’ fees...more
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Yegiazaryan v. Smagin opens the door for foreign plaintiffs to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) as an additional tool for collecting on international...more
The US Supreme Court has opened the door for foreign plaintiffs to sue under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), which provides treble damages and attorneys’ fees, to assist enforcement of an...more
In the United States, trademarks are governed on the federal level by the Lanham Act (also known as the Trademark Act of 1946), which was enacted on July 5, 1946, and is codified at 15 U.S.C. § 1051 et seq. The Lanham Act...more
The Supreme Court’s June 29, 2023, decision in Abitron Austria GMBH v. Hetronic Int’l, Inc., No. 21-1043, ended decades of circuit splits on the standard for determining the extraterritorial reach of the Lanham Act (see our...more
On June 29, 2023, in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Lanham Act does not have an extraterritorial scope and applies only in cases where the alleged infringing “use...more
In a decision that may make it more difficult for brand owners to enforce their marks against infringers located outside of the United States, the Supreme Court of the United States vacated the judgment of the US Court of...more
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision on June 29, 2023, addressing the scope of federal trademark law on conduct occurring outside of the United States. The case, Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc.,...more
There have been many newsworthy rulings coming out of the Supreme Court in the last two weeks, so it is understandable if you missed this one. On Thursday, June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Tenth Circuit wrongly...more
On June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of the petitioner in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International Inc. However, the justices were divided 5-4 as to the precise reasoning and what facts...more
The U.S. Supreme Court held that a foreign plaintiff can sue a domestic U.S. judgment-debtor under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO") for the debtor's fraudulent domestic efforts to avoid...more
The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that the Lanham Act infringement and unfair competition provisions "are not extraterritorial and that they extend only to claims where the claimed infringing use in commerce is domestic." In...more
Thank you for reading the June 2023 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter. This month, we begin a three-part series that closely examines ways to lose trademark rights; share an article that examines the...more
The US Supreme Court ruled today in the closely watched Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc. case, which considered whether a party could recover in US courts for trademark infringement that occurred outside...more
On June 22, 2023, a 6-3 Opinion issued in Yegiazaryan v. Smagin, No. 22-381, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff—whether located in the United States or abroad—may use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt...more
Circuit courts have struggled for decades to adopt a uniform approach for when to apply the Lanham Act extraterritorially. That struggle may end soon. In the Abitron Austria case, the Supreme Court is set to clarify the scope...more
On June 13, 2022, the Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated decision on the issue of whether 28 U.S.C. § 1782 permits district courts to order discovery for use in international commercial arbitration or ad hoc...more
Law360 has published “Using Int'l Discovery Statute After High Court Limits Its Scope” The article discusses foreign litigants’ use of U.S.-based discovery procedures pursuant to Section 1782 of the U.S. Code, as well as...more
Anyone involved in civil litigation in the United States knows that U.S. courts permit broad discovery, in contrast to many foreign tribunals with narrower discovery rules. What foreign litigants may not know is that, under...more
On June 13, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided whether 28 U.S.C. § 1782 – a provision of U.S. law that allows a federal district court to compel a resident individual or company to provide discovery for use “in a proceeding...more
Parties seeking to use the US court system to facilitate discovery in foreign commercial and investor-state arbitrations may no longer have that option. ...more
On June 13, 2022, the US Supreme Court decided ZF Automotive US, Inc. v. Luxshare, Ltd., No. 21-401, holding that Section 1782 requires a “foreign or international tribunal” be a tribunal imbued with governmental authority....more