Law Firm ILN-telligence Podcast | Episode 92: Ron Davis | Fogler Rubinoff
JONES DAY TALKS®: Class Actions Worldview Guide: Part 1–The United States and European Union
Policyholders vs. Insurers: 3 Arguments to Make When Selecting Defense Counsel & Hourly Rates
Goldberg Segalla Product Liability Series: Containing Nuclear and Thermo Nuclear Verdicts
State AG Pulse | Money, Money, Money: Where does it go and why?
Preparing for Litigation in the U.S.
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
CorpCast Episode 2: Advancement 101
How This Investment Firm Hopes to Revolutionize Litigation in America
The NCAA national men’s and women’s basketball tournaments will begin on March 17, 2024 and end with the national championship games in early April. Broadcast stations often conduct promotions tied to these tournaments...more
What is the difference between a traditional trademark and trade dress protection? Traditional Trademarks - According to the USPTO - A trademark can be any word, phrase, symbol, design, or a combination of these things...more
2020 was a busy year for trademark litigation, with three U.S. Supreme Court decisions and several high-profile lower court cases involving trademark law. But many folks are understandably eager to put 2020 in the rearview...more
Late last month, in a landmark decision heralded by brand owners, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Romag Fasteners, Inc v Fossil Group, Inc that a plaintiff in a trademark infringement suit is not required to show that a...more
Brand owners looking to enforce their rights expeditiously (and inexpensively) need look no further than Canada, which offers brand owners a number of tools to obtain relief against infringers and counterfeiters in a...more
The U.S. Supreme Court's recent 9-0 decision in Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., Case No. 18-801, informs strategic cost considerations in appeals challenging adverse decisions issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office...more
On December 11, 2019, in Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., 589 U.S. __ (2019), the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision holding that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) cannot recover the salaries of its legal...more
In a short opinion issued on December 11, 2019, the Supreme Court rejected the PTO’s recent attempt to collect attorneys’ fees under a little-used provision of the Patent Act. The decision in Peter v. NantKwest (No. 18-801)...more
In This Issue - A Looming AI War: Transparency v. IP Rights - As artificial intelligence systems become more prevalent in daily life, efforts to create a unifying set of AI principles have intensified. In the past few...more
The descendants of a well-known Danish scientist could not prevent the commercial use of the name ØRSTED as a trademark, domain and company name by the Ørsted Group (former Dong Energy A/S)....more
On Monday, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in Iancu v. NantKwest to resolve a circuit split concerning “expenses” a patent applicant must pay when challenging the United States Patent and Trademark...more
A party appealing a PTO decision must pay the PT0's expenses regardless of the applicant's success. Booking.com successfully challenged the United States Patent and Trademark Office's ("PTO") refusal to register its mark...more
This decision should be a welcome development for patent applicants seeking review. On July 27, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its en banc opinion in NantKwest, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 16-1794...more
On July 27, 2018, the Federal Circuit ruled that a patent applicant’s obligation to pay the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) “expenses” for district court proceedings to review patent application rejections does not...more
On June 23, 2017, the Federal Circuit confirmed in Nantkwest, Inc. v. Matal (No. 2016-1794) that patent applicants facing rejection from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) may seek relief in the Eastern District of...more