News & Analysis as of

Lanham Act Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP

Intellectual Property Law: Looking Forward to 2023

With the continuing advancements of cutting-edge technologies — such as genome editing (CRISPR) and Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) — U.S. courts will have a full docket of challenging IP cases throughout 2023. Below are some of...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

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets

Unitary Design Mark Rescues a Phrase Which Failed To Function As A Trademark

In a recent decision on remand from the Federal Circuit, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) rejected Petitioner adidas AG’s (“adidas”) claim that Respondent Christian Faith Fellowship Church (“CFFC”) abandoned its...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

Proskauer Rose LLP

Three Point Shot - August 2017

Proskauer Rose LLP on

Eastern District Heavyweight Bout Ends in Stunning Trademark Technical Knockout - Floyd Mayweather and Connor McGregor's late-August 2017 matchup may be the most highly anticipated boxing event in decades. But while "The...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

This was a busy week for precedential cases at the Circuit. In AIA v. Avid, the Circuit rules that there is no right to a jury trial as to requests for attorney fees under § 285. In Romag v. Fossil, a majority rules that the...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Intellectual Property Bulletin - Winter 2017

Fenwick & West LLP on

A Smooth Patch in a Rough Road? Governmental Transition and Intellectual Property - Whenever a new Congress convenes, some IP issues come to the fore while others take a back seat. Transition to a new administration in the...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

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Intellectual Property Law - July 2016

Supreme Court: Status Quo in Cuozzo - Why it matters: On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Cuozzo Speed Technologies v. Lee, where it rejected challenges to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Intellectual Property Law - February 2016

Both Sides Claim Victory in ITC Ruling re Converse's "Chuck Taylors" - Why it matters: On November 17, 2015, an International Trade Commission judge issued an initial ruling in In the Matter of Certain Footwear...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

14 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