WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Oct. 4 reply brief, the owner of a patent relating to mobile image capture, transmission and storage urged the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reverse a Delaware federal judge’s determination that an infringement action was “exceptional” under Section 285 of the Patent Act.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Two weeks after a collection of amicus curiae briefs were filed supporting the respondent in a dispute over whether an intent to deceive is necessary to invalidate a copyright application, the U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 12 granted a motion for divided argument by the acting solicitor general, who had filed an amicus brief supporting the petitioner.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — An apiarist tells the U.S. Supreme Court in an Oct. 1 opposition brief that it did not violate the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) when it replaced a rival’s product name in some promotional verbiage with its own product name because the removed words did not constitute copyright management information (CMI) as defined by the statute.
SAN DIEGO — In an order issued Oct. 11, a federal judge in California permanently enjoined four defendants accused of infringing copyrights associated with “Oh, the Places You’ll Go!” (“Go”) and other works by Dr. Seuss Enterprise LP (DSE), after the parties announced they had settled their dispute.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Oct. 12 reply brief supporting its petition for certiorari, the maker of Pocky says that the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred in finding the snack food’s trade dress to be functional and, therefore, not protectable, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to clarify the standard for determining functionality and to resolve a circuit split on the topic.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In response to a petition for rehearing filed by an inventor, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct. 12 reissued an August ruling concluding that the Patent Act is insufficiently explicit to overcome the presumption against fee-shifting with regard to expert witness fees incurred by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in actions brought under Section 145 of the statute.
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In an Oct. 12 petition for inter partes review filed with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, a maker of fruit and vegetable juice concentrates argues that a patent is directed to “an ancient, federally-regulated meat preservation process using a plant-based nitrite curing solution” already deemed “as old as the hills” by the board, and should thus be canceled.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a dispute over various patents that have since expired, an infringement defendant maintains in an Oct. 13 appellee brief filed with the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that the method of maintaining “crowd control” in a virtual network recited in the claims was correctly deemed ineligible for patenting under Section 101 of the Patent Act by a Massachusetts federal judge.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In its Oct. 12 order list, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to weigh in on an appeal by a patent owner of a March ruling by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that the disputed technology is indefinite.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A ruling by the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that a copyright owner was entitled to just one statutory damage award for separate and distinct acts of infringement was left intact on Oct. 12 when the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for certiorari in the case.
SAN FRANCISCO — Abel Tesfaye, known as “The Weeknd,” prevailed Oct. 8 when the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a California federal judge’s determination that the pop artist is not liable for copyright infringement in connection with his 2016 song “A Lonely Night.”
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A method and system for “enhancing a target sound signal” from “multiple sound signals” would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art (POSITA), Google LLC maintains in an Oct. 7 petition for inter partes review filed with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
NEW ORLEANS — In an Oct. 8 unpublished ruling, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said that a Texas federal judge erred in granting Target Corp. a motion to dismiss allegations the retailer infringed the copyrighted two-dimensional design of a children’s pajama garment.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A New York federal judge did not abuse his discretion when refusing to issue an order compelling Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America Inc. (collectively, Samsung) to withdraw petitions for inter partes review of two patents, a panel majority of the Federal Circuit U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Oct. 7.
NEW YORK — A federal judge in Connecticut properly concluded that the screenplay for the horror film “Friday the 13th” was not a work for hire, rendering the author’s subsequent termination of the film production company’s copyright in the work valid, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Sept. 30.
SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Oct. 7 that a district court properly found that no evidence supports a medical company’s claims that laboratories and doctors switched to a competitors’ blood tests based on false advertising, while a dissenting judge said the district court erred and that triable issues exist.
NEW YORK — In an Oct. 5 holding, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found no error in a New York federal judge’s determination that copyright infringement allegations leveled against a Spanish-language media firm were objectively unreasonable.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Although concluding that a request for ex parte reexamination of patented method of controlling remote equipment raised substantial new questions of patentability, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Sept. 29 nonetheless disagreed with a determination by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) that it lacks the authority to reconsider institution of reexamination.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Oct. 6 holding, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals agreed with a federal judge in Minnesota that allegations of patent and trademark infringement leveled against Target Brands Inc. cannot proceed because the plaintiff in the case does not own the intellectual property he asserted.
DENVER — The failure of a cell phone case manufacturer to confer with the company it sued for trademark infringement before moving to exclude expert witnesses is grounds for denial of that motion, a Colorado federal magistrate judge ruled Sept. 27, but in the interest of “meaningful negotiations” over the methodology, she denied the motion in part without prejudice and found that the expert meets the qualification standard under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.