WASHINGTON, D.C. — An award of $1.2 billion in damages for infringement of a cancer immunotherapy patent was reversed Aug. 26 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, based upon the panel’s finding that the patent in suit suffers from inadequate written description support.
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — Discovery Inc., owner of the cable channel HGTV, won summary judgment in Alabama federal court on Aug. 26 that it did not infringe a copyrighted teaser-trailer for a television show featuring a mother-daughter home renovation team when it developed “Good Bones.”
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Appealing the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ ruling that it was entitled to only one statutory damages award for what it claims were distinct acts of infringement of the same copyrighted fabric design by five parties that are not jointly or severally liable, a fabric supplier in an Aug. 16 petition for certiorari asks the U.S. Supreme Court to provide guidance for statutory awards under Section 504 of the Copyright Act.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred in belatedly adopting the “outdated” doctrine of presale initial interest confusion, a bed and mattress seller tells the U.S. Supreme Court in an Aug. 11 petition for certiorari, arguing that the doctrine and the appeals court’s ruling fail to take into account the realities of online shopping.
ST. LOUIS — In an Aug. 12 reply brief in the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, a clothing retailer argues that a trial court erred in holding that a single online sale of an item that infringed its trademark did not confer Missouri jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant in light of the website’s highly interactive nature.
SAN FRANCISCO — In an Aug. 27 holding, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in a trademark case that the exercise of nationwide jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant does not violate due process where the defendant’s contacts with the United States were extensive.
PHILADELPHIA — Two companies that purchased the right to franchise fitness studios failed to show that they are likely to succeed on claims that the fitness studio creator and her two companies breached their agreement or violated a noncompete clause when the creator failed to immediately begin operating her existing studios as franchises and instead began operating them under another name, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held Aug. 10, affirming a district court’s denial of a motion for preliminary injunction.
PITTSBURGH — A man who contends that he has an ownership interest in intellectual property that is used in a relief valve system for hydraulic fracturing on Aug. 25 filed a lawsuit in Pennsylvania federal court against a company that sells a product that performs the same function, contending that the patent for the device in question is based on his “fundamental idea” and, therefore, the patent is unenforceable.
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In an Aug. 26 petition for inter partes review, Bank of America (BoA) N.A. tells the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that various claims of a patented process for identifying objects in a digital image displayed on a device’s display screen would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art (POSITA).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Aug. 26 holding, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said that a Delaware federal judge properly construed “three-dimensional spreadsheet” as the term exists in the preamble of a patent allegedly infringed by the “Google Sheets” platform.
NEW YORK — Allegations that the maker of the brand name drug ACTOS mischaracterized the scope of its combination patents to gain an anti-competitive edge will proceed in New York federal court, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Aug. 25, affirming a denial of the drug maker’s motion to dismiss.
SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge erred in concluding that “exclusive ownership” as the phrase exists in a provision in a California copyright law extends to the right of public performance of pre-1972 works, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals concluded Aug. 24.
ATLANTA — A panel majority of the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 6 upheld a Florida federal judge’s grant of summary judgment, agreeing that several accused domain names are confusingly similar to a trademark owned by a nationwide franchisor of hair removal services.
DENVER — The 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 5 dismissed an appeal by a Sonic franchisee and its affiliates of a preliminary injunction barring their use of the “Sonic” trademark, which was later converted by an Oklahoma federal judge to a permanent injunction.
SAN FRANCISCO — A per curiam panel of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals agreed with a federal judge in California on Aug. 20 that a copyright owner is not entitled to a permanent injunction or reimbursement of its attorney fees despite prevailing on claims of willful infringement against the operator of website.
PHOENIX — One year after Arizona State University (ASU) filed suit against a John Doe defendant who created an Instagram account that was critical of the university’s policies and practices related to COVID-19, an Arizona federal judge on Aug. 17 denied the university’s motion for default judgment and dismissed its trademark-related claims, finding that no reasonable consumer would have mistaken the account as being affiliated with the university.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 23 agreed with a construction by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of two disputed claim terms in a patent relating to a surgical tool mounting device, but disagreed with the board that the technology would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A claimed design for the display of soup cans in grocery stores was erroneously confirmed by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board as patentable, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Aug. 19.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The designer of a bike frame adopted by Peloton Interactive Inc. told the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Aug. 18 that a federal judge in New York erred in determining the designer must defend and indemnify Peloton in a patent infringement action.
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — The Patent Trial and Appeal Board on Aug. 18 instituted inter partes review (IPR) of a patented method of percutaneous implantation of a cardiovascular implant with a “formed-in-place” support structure.