WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Aug. 8 opposition brief in the U.S. Supreme Court, a management firm for the band The Commodores argues that a trial court properly applied trademark law in issuing a worldwide injunction preventing a former member from using the mark overseas, asking the high court to deny his petition for certiorari (Thomas McClary, et al. v. Commodores Entertainment Corp., No. 18-47, U.S. Sup.).
LAS VEGAS — Rimini Street Inc. on Aug. 16 sought an emergency stay of a Nevada federal judge’s order two days earlier that permanently enjoined the software support firm from preparing or distributing derivative works based upon Oracle USA Inc.’s copyrighted software and awarded Oracle $28.5 million in attorney fees (Oracle USA Inc. v. Rimini Street Inc., No. 10-106, D. Nev., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137311).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Following supplemental briefing on the proper construction of the disputed claim terms “crown” and “upper opening,” the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on Aug. 14 turned away allegations that a Taylor Made Golf Co. Inc. golf club head with a composite crown is unpatentable (Parsons Xtreme Golf LLC v. Taylor Made Golf Company Inc., No. IPR2018-00657, PTAB).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A request by VIZIO Inc. for inter partes review (IPR) of nine claims of a patent relating to computer graphics processing was turned away as time-barred by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on Aug. 14 (VIZIO Inc. v. ATI Technologies ULC, No. IPR2018-00560, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Various digital camera manufacturers won a stay on Aug. 15 of multidistrict litigation when a District of Columbia federal judge agreed that the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals should first weigh in on the validity of the four patents at issue in the case (In re: Papst Licensing GMBH & Co. Patent Litigation, Nos. 07-493, MDL 1880, D. D.C.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Aug. 15 ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals agreed with a Texas federal judge that three patents relating to a “self-evolving generic index” for organizing information stored in a database are invalid as ineligible (BSG Tech LLC v. BuySeasons Inc. and Rakuten Commerce LLC, No. 17-1980, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 22704).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Delaware federal judge did not abuse his discretion in deeming patent infringement claims by Rembrandt Technologies LP against myriad cable providers exceptional, but his corresponding award of attorney fees must be vacated for its failure to fully connect the award with Rembrandt’s misconduct, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in July, in a decision unsealed Aug. 15 (In re: Rembrandt Technologies LP Patent Litigation, No. 17-1784, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals correctly found that it was entitled to an award of nontaxable costs in a software copyright infringement suit, Oracle USA Inc. tells the U.S. Supreme Court in an Aug. 1 brief opposing a software support firm’s petition for certiorari, citing the Copyright Act’s provision for a discretionary award of “all costs” to a prevailing party (Rimini Street Inc., et al. v. Oracle USA Inc., et al., No. 17-1625, U.S. Sup.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In an Aug. 14 opposition, a patent owner tells the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that it correctly denied institution of a Google LLC petition for inter partes review on July 3 (Google LLC v. IPA Technologies Inc., No. IPR2018-00384, PTAB).
SAN DIEGO — A website post depicting a “Trauma Training Kit” (TTK) intended for training first responders and other medical professionals did not constitute an “offer for sale” and, thus, cannot form the basis of an allegation of patent infringement, a California federal judge ruled Aug. 13 (Strategic Operations Inc. v. Brea Joseph, et al., No. 17-1539, S.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136602).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Aug. 10 amicus curiae brief, ACT | The App Association tells the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that because the inter partes review (IPR) procedure “is neither a suit nor a private party’s complaint,” a state “cannot countermand” a decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to institute IPR by invoking sovereign immunity (Regents of the University of Minnesota v. LSI Corporation, et al., No. 18-1559; Regents of the University of Minnesota v. Ericsson Inc., Nos. 2018-1560, -1561, -1562, -1563, -1564, -1565, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Findings by a District of Columbia federal judge that the “La Michoacana” trademark lacks distinctiveness when used in connection with a Mexican ice cream treat were not clearly erroneous, the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Aug. 13; however, the panel additionally found that even if the mark were protectable, a false association defendant failed to establish priority of use in the United States (Paleteria La Michoacana Inc., et al. v. Productos Lacteos Tocumbo S.A. De C.V., No. 17-7075, D.C. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 22396).
MIAMI — A patent owner’s interpretation of the false marking provision of Section 287(a) of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 287(a), “would run contrary to the statute’s purpose to prevent innocent infringement, encourage patentees to give notice to the public that the article in question is patented, and aid the public in identifying whether an article is patented,” a Florida federal judge ruled Aug. 10, granting a defendant summary judgment (Arctic Cat Inc. v. Bombardier Recreational Products Inc., No. 14-62369, S.D. Fla., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134898).
SAN FRANCISCO — In an Aug. 1 per curiam holding, a divided Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that although a pro se copyright infringement plaintiff failed to plead sufficient facts to withstand a motion to dismiss, a California federal judge abused his discretion by denying leave to amend (Jon Astor-White v. Daniel William Strong, et al., No. 16-55565, 9th Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 21359).
TRENTON, N.J. — A New Jersey federal judge on Aug. 10 joined with judges in the Southern District of California, the Eastern District of Texas, the Eastern District of Virginia, the Eastern District of Texas, the Middle District of Florida and the District of Delaware in determining that stays of patent litigation pending the outcome of petitions for covered business method (CBM) and inter partes review (IPR) are “premature” (Nasdaq Inc., et al. v. Miami International Holdings Inc., et al., No. 17-6664, D. N.J., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135193).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Although upholding a Florida federal judge’s dismissal of an action seeking a declaratory judgment of patent inventorship, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 10 ruled that dismissal was warranted for failure to state a claim and, thus, should have occurred with prejudice (Michael Pappalardo v. Samantha Stevins, No. 18-1237, Fed. Cir.).
ST. LOUIS — In an Aug. 9 holding, the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal on copyright preemption grounds of trade dress and tortious interference claims levied in a dispute over a light installation, but found that a proposed, amended trademark infringement claim should be allowed to proceed (Bruce Munro, et al. v. Lucy Activewear Inc., et al., No. 16-4483, 8th Cir.).
LOS ANGELES — A design patent covering a style of “UGG” boots is not invalid as obvious, a California federal judge concluded Aug. 8 following a bench trial (Deckers Outdoor Corporation v. Romeo & Juliette Inc., No. 15-2812, C.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133784).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Oral arguments before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals were held Aug. 9 in a dispute between Facebook Inc. and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), which upheld an examiner’s denial of a patent application by the social media giant on grounds of anticipation (In re: Facebook Inc., No. 17-2524, Fed. Cir.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A patent issued in November 2017 relating to a method of making a version of the 1800s board game reversi “more interesting” covers ineligible subject matter and contain “nothing inventive,” a petitioner for post-grant review (PGR) on Aug. 7 told the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Supercell Oy v. Gree Inc., No. PGR2018-00091, PTAB).