Mondaq USA: Intellectual Property
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
The Court disagreed on all three.
Proskauer Rose LLP
In a recently issued decision, the Second Circuit held that a food truck could not be excluded from a New York State lunch program solely because the truck and the food it sells was branded using ethnic slurs.
Smith Gambrell & Russell LLP
The applicant's mark was for "beer" while the registrant's marks were for "Beer, ale, lager, stout and porter; Malt liquor; Pale beer".
BakerHostetler
BakerHostetler has created a web-based tool, which summarizes cases addressing copyright protection for computer software.
Foley & Lardner
A new USPTO fee schedule took effect on January 16, 2018, which usually means that all fees must be paid at the new (higher) rate.
Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
In the first precedential decision of the new year, the Board reversed the USPTO's refusal to register the mark shown below, for various mailing services...
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
In Wi-Fi One, LLC v. Broadcom Corp., No. 2015-1944 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 8, 2018), the Federal Circuit, en banc, held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)'s time-bar determination under § 315(b)...
Bowditch
Who says trademark disputes can't be fun? Well, plenty of people, but that's beside the point. Anheuser Busch InBev recently showed that a serious legal message can be delivered in a humorous form.
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Prosecution Pointer 112.
Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
The PTAB's decision illustrates that while skepticism by some may be helpful to patent owners, skepticism by the right people may be critical.
Foley Hoag LLP
Over the past few years, we have seen numerous instances of companies protecting their trademarks in creative ways – approaches that leverage humor and the brands themselves in order to achieve an acceptable legal outcome ...
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
On January 10, the en banc Federal Circuit held in Wi-Fi One, LLC v. Broadcom Corp. that inter partes review time bar determinations under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) are appealable ...
Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
In its first en banc decision of 2018, the Federal Circuit held that "judicial review is available for a patent owner to challenge the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's ...
BakerHostetler
2017 was a big year for raising the profile of copyright in protecting computer programs. Two cases in particular helped bring attention to a myth that was addressed and dispelled some time ago ...
BakerHostetler
In Finjan v. Blue Coat Systems, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rendered a decision containing interesting rulings on patentable subject matter (affirming the District Court...
Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.
This proceeding began with an opposition filed on October 14, 2014.
Brooks Kushman
The PTAB recently designated two decisions as informative that concern the time bar to filing an inter partes review (IPR).
Womble Bond Dickinson
Part of the enjoyment of Halloween and Christmas is seeing the clever decorations and novelties people come up with for these two celebrations.
Shearman & Sterling LLP
On October 18, 2017, the PTAB, which had previously declined to institute the IPR requested by the petitioner in General Plastic Industrial Co. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha ...
Jones Day
In Microsoft Corp. v. Biscotti, Inc., Nos. 2016-2080, -2082, -2083, 2017 WL 6613262 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 28, 2017)...
Latest Video
Most Popular Recent Articles
Morgan Lewis
Amgen paints a different picture as to the bad actor during the parties' negotiations pursuant to the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act.
Ropes & Gray LLP
Scott McKeown, Ropes & Gray IP litigation partner and chair of the firm's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) group, discusses potential impacts of pending Supreme Court PTAB cases...
RPX Corporation
F2VS Technologies, Inc. has added two cases to the campaign that it began this past June, suing Acuity Brands (Acuity Brands Lighting) (1:17-cv-04774) and Daintree Networks (1:17-cv-01713).
Ropes & Gray LLP
Patent prosecutors navigate complex USPTO rules and seemingly esoteric examinational requirements to procure patent rights.
RPX Corporation
Computer Protection IP, LLC (CPIP) has filed its first affirmative lawsuit, accusing New Dream Network (DreamHost) (2:17-cv-08858) of infringing a single server security patent.
RPX Corporation
A patent infringement suit brought against Google by Personal Audio, LLC has been transferred from the Eastern District of Texas (1:15-cv-00350) to the District of Delaware (1:17-cv-01751) due to improper venue.
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Succeeding in obtaining a ruling in an inter partes review petition at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that issued patent claims are unpatentable, may not be enough to modify ...
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP
The Court nonetheless reversed the refusal to register "FUCT."
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
The Federal Circuit held that the "immoral or scandalous" clause of Lanham Act § 2(a), which prohibits registration of a trademark that "consists of or comprises immoral or scandalous matter," ...
Carlson, Caspers, Vandenburgh, Lindquist & Schuman, P.A.
Recently, the Federal Circuit reversed a jury decision upholding the validity of two Amgen patents directed to a large genus of antibodies that reduce LDL cholesterol.
Article Search Using Filters
Related Topics
Mondaq Advice Center (MACs)
Popular Authors
Popular Contributors
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
Partners
In association with