News & Analysis as of

Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding Lanham Act Patent Litigation

Irwin IP LLP

Paws vs. Jaws: Dawgs Take on Crocs in The Federal Circuit

Irwin IP LLP on

Crocs, Inc. v. Effervescent, Inc., No. 1:06-cv-00605 (Fed. Cir. October 3, 2024) - On October 3, 2024, the Federal Circuit held that a party may be liable for false advertising violations under Section 43(a)(1)(B) of the...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

MarkIt to Market® - April 2021

[co-author: Joseph Diorio, Law Clerk] The April 2021 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter discusses the suit filed by Nike over MSCHF's "Satan Shoes"; the latest PTAB decision in the ongoing battle...more

Miller Canfield

Supreme Court Remains Focused on Intellectual Property, Adds Two Trademark Cases For Next Term

Miller Canfield on

The Supreme Court granted certiorari in two trademark cases on June 28, 2019, adding them to its docket for next term. Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., et al. concerns whether, under Section 35 of the Lanham Act, 15...more

A&O Shearman

Intellectual Property Newsletter - January 2018

A&O Shearman on

Shearman & Sterling’s IP litigation team has published its latest newsletter. The newsletter addresses a number of current IP topics, ranging from the constitutionality and judicial reviewability of inter partes review to...more

Knobbe Martens

This Year’s Top Ten IP Cases

Knobbe Martens on

#10 Design Patent Damages § 289 - Samsung Elecs. Co., v. Apple Inc., 580 U.S. _ (Dec. 6, 2016) - In the case of a multicomponent product, the relevant article of manufacture for arriving at a damages award under...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Seven IP Cases to Watch in Early 2017

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

SCA Hygiene AB v. First Quality Baby Products. LLC (Docket No. 15-927, S. Ct.) - In SCA Hygiene AB v. First Quality Baby Products LLC,the Supreme Court will consider “[w]hether and to what extent the defense of laches...more

Knobbe Martens

2015 IP Law Year In Review

Knobbe Martens on

Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 1920 (May 26, 2015) - ..Does a defendant’s belief that a patent is invalid serve as a defense to charges of inducing infringement? NO - ..Inducement requires...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

IP Newsletter - July 2015

In This Issue: - En Banc Federal Circuit Abandons “Strong” Presumption That a Limitation Is Not Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, Paragraph 6 - Supreme Court Rejects Belief of Invalidity Defense for Inducement in...more

8 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide