ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A Virginia federal magistrate judge on Aug. 10 found that law firm Debevoise & Plimpton LLP had sufficiently established that the registrants of two internet domains incorporating its trademark had violated the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) by registering them in bad faith, recommending permanent transfer of the domains to the plaintiff.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 9 turned away a bid for mandamus in which Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. (HPE) challenged a Texas federal judge’s refusal to transfer a patent dispute to Massachusetts federal court.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Even under new limitations on assignor estoppel recently established by the U.S Supreme Court, an infringement defendant is estopped from challenging the validity of an endometrial ablation patent because claim 1 of the patent is not “materially broader” than the claims that were assigned, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Aug. 11.
NEW YORK — Past intentional actions by Vimeo Inc. in which it actively selected videos for its online platform’s library that infringed their copyrights prevent the company from claiming safe harbor under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a group of record labels argue in their Aug. 2 reply brief, asking the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to vacate a lower court judgment in Vimeo’s favor and remand for a jury trial.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The operator of the Genius song lyrics website filed a petition for certiorari Aug. 5, asking the U.S. Supreme Court “to restore clarity . . . on the scope of statutory preemption under the Copyright Act,” asserting that the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred in finding that its state law contract-related claims over Google LLC’s purported copying of lyrics from its site are preempted by federal law.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A photographer tells the U.S. Supreme Court in an Aug. 8 respondent brief that the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals correctly found that works created by Andy Warhol using a photo she took of the musician Prince were not sufficiently transformative to allow the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts Inc. (AWF) to claim fair use as a defense to copyright infringement, telling the high court that under the petitioner’s theory of transformativeness, “fair use becomes a license to steal.”
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A system and method of drilling a well is directed to the abstract idea of selecting an optimal convergence path using standard criteria any person of skill in the art would consider when designing a well path, a petitioner for post-grant review (PGR) told the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on Aug. 8.
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In an Aug. 8 petition for post-grant review (PGR) filed with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, a crop protection company seeks cancellation of various claims of a Bayer Cropscience LP patent relating to the herbicide indaziflam on grounds of inadequate written description and anticipation.
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Citing several prior art references, Apple Inc. on Aug. 9 told the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that a patented smart watch capable of receiving wireless signals from a mobile phone would be obvious to a person of skill in the art.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) correctly denied two patent applications on the basis that the applicant failed to list a human inventor, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Aug. 5, in a blow to the artificial intelligence industry.
ATLANTA — A federal judge in Florida wrongly awarded more than 30 plaintiffs summary judgment on their allegations of false advertising and false endorsement by the managing members of a Miami nightclub, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Aug. 4.
ST. LOUIS — Upholding a trial court’s dismissal of a trademark infringement lawsuit for lack of jurisdiction, an Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Aug. 2 ruled that a California T-Shirt company’s sale of one shirt via its website to a Missouri customer was not sufficient to constitute purposeful availment that would establish specific jurisdiction over the out-of-state defendant.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Aug. 5 summary ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld findings by the International Trade Commission (ITC) that a single claim of a patent directed to activity monitoring is ineligible for patenting or anticipated by prior art.
SAN FRANCISCO — In an Aug. 5 holding, a federal judge in California said an amended copyright infringement complaint overcomes the jurisdictional deficiencies which led her to dismiss the lawsuit just six months earlier.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A federal judge in Delaware misapplied the law in determining that an appellee qualifies as a co-inventor of a patented method for precooked bacon, Hormel Foods Corp. told the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals July 18.
MIAMI — On the heels of a January decision by the 11th Circuit U.S Court of Appeals affirming a grant of summary judgment in favor of a copyright infringement defendant, a Florida federal magistrate judge on Aug. 4 recommended the defendant be awarded more than $1 million in attorney fees and costs.
CHICAGO — A federal judge in Illinois on Aug. 4 denied a motion to dismiss allegations of copyright infringement and trade secret misappropriation leveled by Philips North America LLC over proprietary software that protects access to features of Philips’ medical imaging devices.
SAN FRANCISCO — Allegations of copyright infringement leveled over the unauthorized use of 12 photographs in an online article were reinstated Aug. 3 by the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which said a California federal judge wrongly found the affirmative defense of fair use applicable in the case.
SEATTLE — Instead of ruling on a pending motion for default judgment and permanent injunction, a federal judge in Washington on Aug. 2 directed a plaintiff to file a supplemental brief regarding its standing to pursue patent and copyright infringement allegations against a competitor.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a July 25 appellant brief filed with the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, a company that specializes in prepaid gift card technology asserts that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board wrongly declared its patent obvious because the cited prior art “discloses a fundamentally different paradigm.”