(Podcast) The Briefing: Trump Train Derailed In “Electric Avenue” Copyright Lawsuit
The Briefing: Trump Train Derailed In “Electric Avenue” Copyright Lawsuit
Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
Using Innovative Technology to Advance Trial Strategies | Episode 70
(Podcast) The Briefing: “Hold On” – You Can’t Use That Music in Your Presidential Campaign
The Briefing: “Hold On” – You Can’t Use That Music in Your Presidential Campaign
(Podcast) The Briefing: Punchbowl News’ Trademark Win Despite Rogers Setback
The Briefing: Punchbowl News’ Trademark Win Despite Rogers Setback
NCAA Settlement Hearing — Highway to NIL Podcast
(Podcast) The Briefing: Does This Court’s Ruling Put an End to Tattoo Copyright Cases?
The Briefing: Does This Court’s Ruling Put an End to Tattoo Copyright Cases?
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 31: Trade Secrets and Protecting Confidential Information with Jennie Cluverius of Maynard Nexsen
4 Key Takeaways | Trade Secret Update 2024 Legal Developments and Trends
The Briefing – Late Night, Early Dismissal: The Santos-Kimmel Copyright Case
(Podcast) The Briefing – Late Night, Early Dismissal: The Santos-Kimmel Copyright Case
(Podcast) The Briefing: Deep Dive into the NO FAKES Act
The Briefing: Deep Dive into the NO FAKES Act
(Podcast) The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
Intellectual property considerations for launching new cannabis products
On August 22, 2024, Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein (S.D.N.Y.) denied Google LLC’s motion for summary judgment that (1) it has not infringed two asserted patents; and (2) the two patents are invalid for lack of written...more
Kilpatrick’s Darin Gibby and David Hsu presented a session during the firm’s annual “SKI-LE” in Vail, Colorado, exploring prosecution laches and continuation application strategies in light of the recent decision in Sonos v....more
The Outcome of the PTAB’s Analysis May Determine Whether the PTAB Engaged in Claim Construction - In Google LLC v. Ecofactor, Inc., Appeal No. 22-1750, the Federal Circuit held that the outcome of the PTAB’s analysis of...more
Today, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision vacating and remanding a PTAB decision based on an erroneous implicit claim construction. Google v. EcoFactor, Case Nos. 2022-1750, 2022-1767 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 7, 2024)....more
Recent headlines have focused on the $1.6 billion damages claim and Google’s possible exposure in Singular Computing’s patent infringement lawsuit involving Google’s “AI-related” chips. $1.6 billion is certainly not chump...more
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has the remarkable ability to develop novel solutions to problems, and patent law has historically protected those solutions. Under current statutes and jurisprudence, however, only...more
On September 18, in identical opinions issued in separate cases against Google and Apple, EDVA District Judge Michael Nachmanoff ruled that four patents directed toward geolocation of mobile devices claimed patent-ineligible...more
PARUS HOLDINGS, INC. V. GOOGLE LLC - Before Lourie, Bryson, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: PTAB did not err in declining to consider...more
Google petitioned for IPR of two patents owned by IPA. Each of the asserted grounds relied on the Martin reference. Martin lists as authors the two inventors of the challenged patents and a third person, Dr. Moran. During...more
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more
In Re Google LLC - Before: Moore, Lourie, and Prost. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The PTO’s arguments on appeal did not reflect the record below....more
Somebody’s Wrong: PTAB Must Resolve Conflicting Factual Testimony During IPR - In Google LLC v. IPA Technologies Inc., Appeal No. 21-1179, the Federal Circuit held that, for purposes of determining whether a reference was...more
GOOGLE LLC v. IPA TECHNOLOGIES INC. Before Dyk, Schall, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: For purposes of determining whether a reference was prior art, the Board has an obligation...more
In November 2020, Google LLC filed two petitions requesting an inter partes review of the claims of Ikorongo Technology LLC (“Ikorongo”) owned U.S. Patent No. 8,874,554 (“the ’554 patent”)....more
DATA ENGINE TECHNOLOGIES LLC v. GOOGLE LLC. Before Reyna, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A patentee that relies on language in the preamble to...more
My team and I regularly carry out Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs) according to Art. 35 GDPR with regard to the deployment of Voice Assistants for private and public bodies in Germany. This article shows my...more
Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Google LLC et al., Appeal No. 2019-1177 (Fed. Cir., January 30, 2020). Google filed an IPR against Philips’ patent relating to a method of forming a media presentation on a client device from...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit elected not to decide en banc whether servers or similar equipment in third-party facilities constitute a regular and established place of business under the patent venue...more
This analysis identified and processed over 8,000 patents and patent applications worldwide relating to blockchain, cryptocurrencies, and cryptographic tokens as of July 2018. The analysis did not include patents and...more
Crowdsourced Content in Video Games: How Ownership Issues Almost “Ganked” a Copyright Case - In Blizzard Entertainment v. Lilith Games (Shanghai) Company, a federal court denied a motion for partial summary judgment for...more
Judgments and Awards - On September 25, 2017, a federal court in San Jose, CA awarded the Defendants Google, YouTube, and On2 Technologies $820,321.41 in attorney’s fees. The Court previously held the Plaintiff Max Sound...more
On Thursday, Waymo LLC sued Uber Technologies and Ottomotto LLC in federal court in the Northern District of California for: (1) violation of the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act; (2) violation of California’s Uniform Trade...more
FinCEN is extending its campaign to press title insurance companies to reveal the real buyers behind shell companies that pay cash for high-end real estate deals in select cities around the country....more
A Smooth Patch in a Rough Road? Governmental Transition and Intellectual Property - Whenever a new Congress convenes, some IP issues come to the fore while others take a back seat. Transition to a new administration in the...more
(Editorial Note: This is the second in our two-part series exploring recent litigation under the newly-enacted Defend Trade Secrets Act.) We’ve been tracking the development of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) for...more