NEW YORK — A dispute over a patented toy will proceed without a preliminary injunction in place because it remains unclear whether an accused product meets various limitations of the patent in suit, a federal judge in New York held Sept. 11 (Ever Victory Technology Limited v. SAS Group Inc., No. 19-486, S.D. N.Y., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154954).
TRENTON, N.J. — A dispute over the “ArmorTec” trademark will proceed in view of findings on Sept. 10 by a federal judge in New Jersey that adoption by EP Henry Corp. of the “ColorTech” trademark for a competing paving stone could cause consumer confusion (Cambridge Pavers Inc. v. EP Henry Corporation, No. 18-14187, D. N.J., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153971).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Efforts by Google Inc. to cancel various claims of a coding patent should fail because the “vast majority” of General Plastic Indus. Co. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha factors weigh against institution of inter partes review (IPR), a patent owner told the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on Sept. 6 (Google Inc. v. Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC, No. IPR2019-01038, PTAB).
LOS ANGELES — Three months after a jury found that VidAngel Inc.’s online video-filtering service ran afoul of the Copyright Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), awarding the plaintiff movie studios $62.4 million, a California federal judge on Sept. 5 granted the studios’ motion for a permanent injunction barring the defendant from any further infringing acts (Disney Enterprises Inc., et al. v. VidAngel Inc., No. 2:16-cv-04109, C.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152395).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Sept. 9 ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board misinterpreted the appellate court’s 2017 mandate that vacated as moot an appeal of an adverse inter partes re-examination (Valspar Sourcing Inc. v. PPG Industries Inc., Nos. 2018-1462, -1463, -2164, -2165, Fed. Cir.).
CENTRAL ISLIP, N.Y. — A lawsuit filed in 2017 by the City of New York that accuses a store of selling counterfeit products does not serve as a bar to new claims by the alleged counterfeiter of trespass and harassment, a New York federal judge ruled Sept. 9 (Salvatore Piccolo, et al. v. Gerald Singleton, No. 18-1324, E.D. N.Y., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153283).
LAS VEGAS — Five months after Oracle USA Inc. was permitted to conduct limited discovery to ensure that Rimini Street Inc. was complying with a permanent injunction against it in a long-running software copyright lawsuit, a Nevada federal magistrate judge on Sept. 6 signed an order setting parameters on that discovery and establishing a schedule for Rimini’s compliance (Oracle USA Inc., et al. v. Rimini Street Inc., et al., No. 2:10-cv-00106, D. Nev.).
CHICAGO — A federal judge in Illinois on Sept. 6 rejected a request for a new trial in a decade-long dispute over patented features of an infant play gym but also denied a patent owner’s request for enhanced damages (Kolcraft Enterprises Inc. v. Chicco USA Inc., No. 09-3339, N.D. Ill., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151958).
SAN FRANCISCO — In a Sept. 6 per curiam holding, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a California federal judge’s determination that consumers are unlikely to be confused by Kia Motors America Inc.’s use of “Drive Wise” in connection with its in-car advance driver assistance system (ADAS) (Allstate Insurance Co. v. Kia Motors America Inc, et al., No. 18-55164, 9th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26994).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Sept. 6 ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed findings by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that a patent application relating to automated systems for personal financial planning claims ineligible subject matter (In re: Mark A. Greenstein, No. 19-1521, Fed. Cir.).
SANTA ANA, Calif. — A federal judge in California on Aug. 26 entered judgment in favor of a bar, restaurant and nightclub operator after finding that a competitor infringed on its federal trademark rights under the Lanham Act, as well as its rights under California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 et seq. (Avenue Hospitality Group, LLC v. Avenue Restaurant and Music Lounge, No. 19-00687, C.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145841).
PHOENIX — Allegations of false patent marking and false advertising in connection with nitric oxide (N-O) test strips were dismissed Sept. 4 by an Alaska federal judge, who found that a plaintiff lacks standing because the parties are not yet direct competitors in the N-O test strip market (ThermoLife International LLC v. NeoGenis Labs Inc., No. 18-2980, D. Ariz., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150457).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a Sept. 5 filing with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Huawei Technologies asserts that a patented graphical user interface (GUI) for displaying network topology would have been obvious in view of prior art (Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. v. Harris Corporation, No. IPR2019-01570, PTAB).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a Sept. 4 holding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board found that Facebook Inc. and two co-petitioners showed a reasonable likelihood that they will prevail in establishing that at least one claim of a Blackberry Limited patent directed to silencing message threads is unpatentable (Facebook Inc., et al. v. Blackberry Limited, No. IPR2019-00706, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Sept. 5 affirmed a Texas federal judge’s decision to transfer a patent infringement action by the Board of Regents of the University of Texas (UT) to Delaware federal court, holding that “the state sovereignty principles asserted by UT do not grant it the right to bring suit in an otherwise improper venue” (Board of Regents of the University of Texas, et al. v. Boston Scientific Corp., No. 18-1700, Fed. Cir.).
SEATTLE — A federal judge in Washington on Sept. 3 granted a trademark infringement defendant summary judgment upon finding that “the use of admittedly similar logos” by a bus manufacturer and a charter flight company “is nevertheless unlikely to result in any consumer confusion” (New Flyer Industries Canada ULC, et al. v. San Juan Airlines, No. 18-299, W.D. Wash., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149689).
CHICAGO — In a Sept. 4 order, a panel of the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals summarily affirmed an Indiana federal judge’s dismissal of allegations of copyright infringement levied against the Indianapolis Public Schools and two co-defendants in connection with their continued use of an educational program (Angela Brooks-Ngwenya v. Indianapolis Public Schools, et al., No. 18-2349, 7th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26639).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Aug. 29 holding, a divided Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel found that a California federal judge did not err in construing various terms in a patent that describes and claims bifunctional molecules, as well as libraries of such molecules (The Scripps Research Institute v. Illumina Inc., No. 18-2089, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26202).
TYLER, Texas — A federal judge in Texas on Aug. 30 denied in full several motions for post-trial relief by patent infringement defendant Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., on the heels of a 2018 jury trial in which Samsung was ordered to pay a patent owner $5.9 million in damages (Papst Licensing GmbH & Co., KG v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., No. 18-388, E.D. Texas, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148186).
NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York did not err in rejecting allegations by a professional photographer that Scholastic Inc. exceeded the terms of its license with a stock photography agency when using his works in its textbooks, nor in denying the photographer leave to amend on grounds of futility, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals concluded Aug. 28 (Michael Yamashita, et al. v. Scholastic Inc., No. 17‐1957, 2nd Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 25958).