GREENSBORO, N.C. — In a July 2 complaint, a plaintiff asserts that R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co. copied its patented design for an e-cigarette after failed negotiations between the parties (Fuma International LLC v. R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co., No. 19-660, M.D. N.C.).
NEW YORK — A New York federal judge on July 10 awarded $8,745.50 in attorney fees as a sanction against counsel for a plaintiff photographer who alleged copyright infringement by NBCUniversal Media LLC (John Curtis Rice v. NBCUniversal Media LLC, No. 19-447, S.D. N.Y., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114690).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a July 10 final written decision, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board found that a petition for inter partes review (IPR) of a patented panoramic viewer fails to establish anticipation or obviousness (Polycom Inc. v. FullView Inc., No. IPR2019-00647, PTAB).
NEW YORK — Citing the recent Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision in GEOMC Co. Ltd. v. Calmare Therapeutics Inc., a New York federal judge on July 8 granted a copyright infringement defendant’s motion for leave to amend its answer (New London Associates LLC v. Kinetic Social LLC, et al., No. 18-7963, S.D. N.Y., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113021).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a June 17 intervenor brief filed in the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, the federal government defends the constitutionality of the practice by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) of conducting inter partes reviews (IPRs) of patents issued before Congress authorized the procedure by statute (Collabo Innovations Inc. v. Sony Corporation, No. 19-1152, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A majority of a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on July 8 upheld the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s rejection of a patent application as obvious, but a dissenting judge criticized the board’s final written decision as “insufficient to allow for meaningful appellate review” (In re: Jeremy Black and Patrick Hayes, No. 18-1166, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 20143).
HOUSTON — Two hydraulic fracturing companies on July 8 filed a complaint in Texas federal court seeking declaratory judgment that they have not infringed a patent for a tool used in well casings in response to a cease-and-desist letter sent to the companies from the designer of a device that is similar to the tool in question (Exacta Frac Energy Services Inc., et al. v. Paul Bernard Lee, No. 19-2459, S.D. Texas).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a July 8 preliminary response, a patent owner urges the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to reject a petition by Apple Inc. for inter partes review (IPR) of a secure message forwarding patent (Apple Inc. v. MPH Technologies OY, No. IPR2019-00821, PTAB).
HOUSTON — A hydraulic fracturing well services company on July 3 sued two other well services companies in Texas federal court, alleging that they knowingly infringe on patents related to a fracking fluid pumping system (U.S. Well Services Inc. v. TOPS Well Services LLC, et al., No. 19-225, S.D. Texas).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Although agreeing with an appellee that a patent owner’s appeal, “as argued,” of a dismissal for improper venue was frivolous, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on July 5 ruled that “we do not believe . . . such misconduct warrants sanctions under these circumstances” (Westech Aerosol Corporation v. 3M Company, et al., No. 18-1699, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 20055).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — An examining attorney’s refusal to register the “APOGÉE” trademark sought by Louis Vuitton Malletier was proper, and the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board did not err in upholding the rejection, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals concluded July 5 (In re: Louis Vuitton Malletier, No. 18-1651, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 20044).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a July 5 patent owner reply, Centripetal Networks Inc. told the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that it should reject allegations of obviousness asserted by Cisco Systems Inc. (Cisco Systems Inc. v. Centripetal Networks Inc., No. IPR2018-01512, PTAB).
LOS ANGELES — Monster Energy Co. on July 3 appealed a federal district court’s order that denied its motion seeking a permanent injunction under the Lanham Act and California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) against the producer and distributor of "Monster Mobile" automotive tools and other related goods and the court’s dismissal of its UCL claim for lack of standing (Monster Energy Company v. Integrated Supply Network, LLC, No. 17-548, C.D. Calif.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In confirming the patentability of various claims of an invention covering error-correcting codes, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board committed “a series of legal errors” and its finding of a lack of motivation to combine prior art references “is unsupported by substantial evidence,” Apple Inc. maintained July 1 in an appellant brief filed with the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Apple Inc. v. California Institute of Technology, Nos. 19-1580, -1581, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Efforts by a patent licensee to overturn a February 2019 determination of patent ineligibility by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals were unsuccessful on July 3, when a majority of the court voted not to rehear en banc a dispute over a method of diagnosing certain neurological disorders; the denial of rehearing spawned eight separate writings by the judges, comprising four concurrences and four dissents (Athena Diagnostics Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services LLC, No. 17-2508, Fed. Cir.).
BOSTON — The First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 2 affirmed a lower federal court’s ruling that a commercial general liability insurance policy’s intellectual property (IP) exclusion bars coverage for underlying trademark infringement claims against a dental product manufacturer insured (Sterngold Dental, LLC v. HDI Global Insurance Company, No. 18-2084, 1st Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 19781).
PHILADELPHIA — A Pennsylvania federal judge did not err in rejecting allegations of copyright infringement by an author levied in connection with Viacom International Inc.’s film adaptation of a children’s book about a Christmas tree, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled July 2 (Jennie Nicassio v. Viacom International Inc., et al., No. 18-2085, 3rd Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 19827).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a July 2 ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals left intact findings by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in three inter partes reviews (IPRs) that various claims of a Finjan computer antivirus patent are patentable, while others are not (Palo Alto Networks Inc. v. Finjan Inc., Nos. 2017-2543, -2623, -2047, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 19752).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A petitioner on July 2 failed to persuade the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to revisit their March 29 decision not to institute inter partes review of a casket patent (Matthews International Corporation v. Vandor Corporation, No. IPR2018-01693, PTAB).
NEW YORK — In a July 1 appellee brief in the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, a bee farm defends a trial court’s dismissal of trademark and copyright claims brought by a former licensor, contending that it did not remove copyright management information (CMI) from the plaintiff’s advertising materials (James H. Fischer v. Stephen T. Forrest Jr., et al., No. 18-2959, 2nd Cir.).