WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — Following an April 11 discovery conference, a Florida federal magistrate judge in a paperless minute entry ordered the parties in a dispute over the ownership of a multibillion dollar bitcoin cache, which belonged to a deceased bitcoin miner, to submit further briefs addressing discovery disputes related to the production of documents and other items (Ira Kleiman, et al. v. Craig Wright, No. 9:18-cv-80176, S.D. Fla.).
SAN FRANCISCO — While expressing its sympathy to the family of a victim of the 2015 Paris terror attacks, Google LLC argues in an April 5 appellee brief to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that a trial court correctly found that the Communications Decency Act (CDA) immunizes it from terror-aiding claims under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) for the purported use of YouTube by terrorists (Reynaldo Gonzalez, et al. v. Google LLC, No. 18-16700, 9th Cir.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — Citing what it calls willful behavior by two of the attorneys representing a putative class of iPhone users, Apple Inc. on April 9 asked a California federal court to sanction the counsel for quoting from documents that which were designated as confidential during discovery at a public hearing on a motion to dismiss the lawsuit alleging degraded performance in the plaintiffs’ mobile devices (In re: Apple Inc. Device Performance Litigation, No. 5:18-md-02827, N.D. Calif.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In what it calls “the copyright case of the decade,” Google LLC filed a reply brief in the U.S. Supreme Court April 10, arguing that a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling in which the court found the copying of certain Java software interface code to be infringement conflicts with longstanding precedent and industry practices, thus meriting high court review despite the lack of a circuit split (Google LLC v. Oracle America Inc., No. 18-956, U.S. Sup.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Claim constructions recently proposed by a patent owner are “improperly narrow” and “contravene the broadest reasonable interpretation” (BRI) standard, Apple Inc. asserts in an April 9 reply brief filed with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Apple Inc. v. Universal Secure Registry LLC, No. IPR2018-00813, PTAB).
LOS ANGELES — A California federal judge on April 8 entered a default judgment and granted an injunction in favor of a musician and against a concert promoter on claims for trademark infringement, violation of California’s unfair competition law (UCL) and other causes of action, ordering the promotor to return all domain names and social media accounts using the singer’s marks (James Todd Smith v. Guerilla Union, Inc., et al., No. 18-9902, C.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60309).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Contrary to a recent petition for inter partes review (IPR) by Google LLC, a patented method of providing ad hoc and password-protected digital and voice networks would not have been obvious to a person of skill in the art (POSITA), the patent owner responded April 4 before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Google LLC v. AGIS Software Development LLC, No. IPR2018-01080, PTAB).
LAS VEGAS — At an April 4 hearing, a Nevada federal magistrate judge granted a motion by Oracle USA Inc. to conduct limited discovery into whether Rimini Street Inc. is complying with an injunction in a long-running software copyright infringement lawsuit (Oracle USA Inc., et al. v. Rimini Street Inc., et al., No. 2:10-cv-00106, D. Nev.).
SAN FRANCISCO — Asserting that Google LLC induces customers to use its AdWords program by misrepresenting the amount of valid clicks they will receive on their advertisements, a small business owner tells the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in a March 29 brief that his unfair competition and false advertising claims were wrongly dismissed without proper consideration of Google’s misrepresentations and his experts’ evidence of click fraud (Gurminder Singh v. Google LLC, No. 18-17035, 9th Cir.).
SEATTLE — Microsoft Corp.’s insurer announced on April 2 that it reached a confidential settlement with an electronic memory chip supplier of its breach of contract subrogation lawsuit seeking to recover the $150 million it paid for damages that Microsoft allegedly incurred when it had to seek substitution for dynamic random access memory (DRAM) chips after a jury found that the supplier did not breach its agreement with Microsoft (Cypress Insurance Company v. SK Hynix America Inc., No. 17-00467, W.D. Wash.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In an April 4 petition for inter partes review before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, a Blackberry Ltd. patent covering an interface feature that indicates the receipt of a new message is accused of obviousness (Facebook Inc. v. Blackberry Ltd., No. IPR2019-00925, PTAB).
SPRINGFIELD, Mass. — A deaf civil rights group sufficiently alleged most of its claims that the websites of Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) are not equally accessible for hearing-impaired people, a Massachusetts federal magistrate judge ruled March 28, mostly denying the schools’ motions for judgment on the pleadings (National Association of the Deaf, et al. v. Harvard University, et al., No. 3:15-cv-30023, D. Mass., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52455; and National Association of the Deaf, et al. v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, No. 3:15-cv-30024, D. Mass., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52457).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a March 28 filing in its Office of Administrative Law Judges, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development charges Facebook Inc. with discrimination in violation of the Fair Housing Act (FHA) by allowing advertisers that are selling or renting homes to target who does or does not see their advertisements based on protected categories, such as race, gender and disability (The Secretary, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development v. Facebook Inc., No. 01-18-0323-8, HUD).
CHICAGO — In a March 22 ruling, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals dismissed as moot an appeal of a preliminary injunction that prohibited four trademark infringement and cybersquatting defendants from registering various domain names (Heron Development Corporation v. Vacation Tours Inc., et al., No. 17-13351, 7th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 7904).
ATLANTA — After a second reversal and remand by the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, a group of publishers and Georgia State University (GSU) filed briefs in Georgia federal court on March 22, arguing as to whether the university’s electronic posting of excerpts from textbooks constituted copyright infringement or was protected as fair use (Cambridge University Press, et al. v. Georgia State University, et al., No. 1:08-cv-01425, N.D. Ga.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Citing a previous petition for certiorari filed by Google LLC more than four years earlier, Oracle America Inc. filed a brief March 27 asking the U.S. Supreme Court to deny the company’s newly filed petition in the long-running dispute over the copyrightability of Java computer code, arguing that Google raises previously rejected arguments without identifying a circuit split that needs to be resolved (Google LLC v. Oracle America Inc., No. 18-956, U.S. Sup.).
LOS ANGELES — Arguing that defendant VidAngel Inc. has been uncooperative in efforts to compile a list of copyrighted movies and programs that were part of its online streaming and filtering service, a group of plaintiff movie studios asks a California federal court in a March 22 motion to require the defendant to comply with the procedure prior to a scheduled June 11 trial on damages for copyright infringement for which VidAngel has already been found liable (Disney Enterprises Inc., et al. v. VidAngel Inc., No. 2:16-cv-04109, C.D. Calif.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a March 25 petition for inter partes review (IPR), Snap Inc. maintains that various claims of a BlackBerry Inc. patent directed to “pushing” targeted advertising to mobile devices would have been obvious to, or anticipated by, a person of skill in the art (POSITA) (Snap Inc. v. BlackBerry Inc., No. IPR2019-00830, PTAB).
SAN JOSE, Calif. — An architect and his firm have failed to cure pleading deficiencies that led to the dismissal of his fourth amended complaint in a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act and trade secret misappropriation lawsuit against Google LLC and others, a federal judge in California ruled March 19 in dismissing the plaintiffs’ RICO and federal trade secret misappropriation law claims with prejudice (Eli Attia, et al. v. Google LLC, et al., No. 17-6037, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99400).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a March 20 divided ruling, a majority of a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel found that Cisco Systems Inc. was entitled to judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) that its infringement of two computer security patents was not willful (SRI International Inc. v. Cisco Systems Inc., No. 17-2223, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 8249).