News & Analysis as of

Patent Litigation Patents Lanham Act

Irwin IP LLP

Paws vs. Jaws: Dawgs Take on Crocs in The Federal Circuit

Irwin IP LLP on

Crocs, Inc. v. Effervescent, Inc., No. 1:06-cv-00605 (Fed. Cir. October 3, 2024) - On October 3, 2024, the Federal Circuit held that a party may be liable for false advertising violations under Section 43(a)(1)(B) of the...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Andersen v. Stability AI: Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Narrows the Case, But Only Slightly

In the lawsuit brought against them for using visual artists' work to teach their large language model, and producing near-identical copies in response to prompts, Stability AI, Midjourney, DeviantArt, and Runway AI moved to...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Make Sure You Behave and Keep Those Hands Clean: How Deceit and Bad Table Manners Can Bite

Last week in Luv n’ Care, Ltd. v. Laurain, the Federal Circuit put the lower court in time out and probably made Eazy-PZ, LLC (EZPZ) cry just a little bit harder. In this precedential decision involving U.S. Patent No....more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Athletic Fashion Dispute in Race to Courthouse

Lululemon and Peloton are suing each other over clothing design patents and trade dress. Specifically, the case involves designs for athletic bras and leggings. Peloton won the "race to the courthouse" in response to a cease...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

10th Circuit Declines to be the Exception and Follows Patent Act Standard for Prevailing Party Attorney’s Fees in “Exceptional...

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Since the Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., district courts have had expanded discretion to award prevailing party attorney’s fees in “exceptional cases” under the Patent...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

MarkIt to Market® - April 2021

[co-author: Joseph Diorio, Law Clerk] The April 2021 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter discusses the suit filed by Nike over MSCHF's "Satan Shoes"; the latest PTAB decision in the ongoing battle...more

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets

Cert. Roundup

The American Bar Association (“ABA”) filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of the petitioner in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., No. 18-1233....more

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets

Cert. Roundup: Romag’s Opening Brief: Imposing a Willfulness Requirement to Recapture Profits is Inconsistent with Statute,...

In June 2019, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Romag Fasteners Inc. v. Fossil Inc., et al., No. 18-1233. As set forth in our previous blog post, Romag Fasteners Inc. (“Romag”) seeks to have the Court...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Chief Judge Stark Denies Plaintiff’s Motion For Preliminary Injunction In Patent Infringement And Lanham Act Action

Fox Rothschild LLP on

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Citrix Systems, Inc. v. Workspot, Inc., Civil Action No. 18-588-LPS (D.Del. August 16, 2019), the Court denied the motion for preliminary injunction sought by...more

Miller Canfield

Supreme Court Remains Focused on Intellectual Property, Adds Two Trademark Cases For Next Term

Miller Canfield on

The Supreme Court granted certiorari in two trademark cases on June 28, 2019, adding them to its docket for next term. Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc., et al. concerns whether, under Section 35 of the Lanham Act, 15...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

District Court Rejects Efforts To Invalidate Design Patents on Automobile Parts

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In a case affecting aftermarket automotive suppliers, on February 20, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan issued a decision declining to invalidate or render unenforceable two of Ford’s design...more

A&O Shearman

Intellectual Property Newsletter - January 2018

A&O Shearman on

Shearman & Sterling’s IP litigation team has published its latest newsletter. The newsletter addresses a number of current IP topics, ranging from the constitutionality and judicial reviewability of inter partes review to...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

The World In U.S. Courts - Fall 2017

FSIA Does Not Exempt US Bank from Subpoena for Production of Records of Accounts Maintained by Central Bank of Nigeria - The World in U.S. Courts: Fall 2017 - Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act (FSIA)/Political Question Doctrine....more

Hogan Lovells

Hogan Lovells ITC Section 337 Monthly Highlights

Hogan Lovells on

The latest news round-up from our Hogan Lovells ITC Section 337 practice, including a new section featuring "tips from the bench" by former ITC Judge Theodore (Ted) R. Essex. ...more

King & Spalding

ITC Section 337 Update – March 2017

King & Spalding on

Commission Reverses ALJ’s Dismissal Of U.S. Steel’s False Designation Of Origin Claim And Sets Hearing On U.S. Steel’s Antitrust Claim In Certain Carbon Steel; U.S. Steel Withdraws Trade Secret Theft Claim – 2017 has produced...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

The World in US Courts: Orrick's Quarterly Review of Decisions Applying US Law to Global Business and Cross-Border Activities

Alien Tort Statute (ATS)/Political Question Doctrine/Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act (FSIA)/ Act of State Doctrine - District Court Dismisses ATS Claim Where Alleged Conduct in US was not Directly Linked to Injuries...more

Knobbe Martens

This Year’s Top Ten IP Cases

Knobbe Martens on

#10 Design Patent Damages § 289 - Samsung Elecs. Co., v. Apple Inc., 580 U.S. _ (Dec. 6, 2016) - In the case of a multicomponent product, the relevant article of manufacture for arriving at a damages award under...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Seven IP Cases to Watch in Early 2017

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

SCA Hygiene AB v. First Quality Baby Products. LLC (Docket No. 15-927, S. Ct.) - In SCA Hygiene AB v. First Quality Baby Products LLC,the Supreme Court will consider “[w]hether and to what extent the defense of laches...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Intellectual Property Law - December 2016

Design Patents—Supreme Court Decides Samsung v. Apple - Why it matters: On December 6, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Samsung v. Apple, holding that, for purposes of a "total profits" damages award for infringement of a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Ninth Circuit Joins Octane Fitness Trend for Trademark Cases

McDermott Will & Emery on

In 2014, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its ruling in Octane Fitness (IP Update, Vol. 17, No. 5), in which it examined the fee-shifting provision of the Patent Act and clarified the types of “exceptional” cases...more

Foley Hoag LLP - Making Your Mark

Ninth Circuit Extends Octane Fitness Attorneys’ Fee Analysis To Lanham Act Cases

In the 2014 case of Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. (and a companion case), the Supreme Court articulated a standard for courts to use when deciding whether to award attorneys’ fees in patent cases. As we...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Intellectual Property Law - October 2016

Federal Circuit After Stryker/Halo - Why it matters: On June 13, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the consolidated cases of Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer, Inc. and Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. and, as...more

BakerHostetler

Federal Circuit Holds Trademark Infringement Must Be Willful to Warrant Award of Infringer’s Profits, Highlighting Continuing...

BakerHostetler on

The Federal Circuit, applying Second Circuit trademark law, has weighed in on the issue of whether an infringer’s profits are recoverable absent a finding of willful infringement. In Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc....more

Dentons

Attorneys' Fees May be Easier to Obtain in Lanham Act Cases Post-Octane Fitness

Dentons on

Intellectual property litigation is expensive for both the plaintiff and defendant. However, because defendants are required to defend themselves in a lawsuit—in comparison to a plaintiff who has the choice to file and...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

IP Newsletter - July 2015

In This Issue: - En Banc Federal Circuit Abandons “Strong” Presumption That a Limitation Is Not Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, Paragraph 6 - Supreme Court Rejects Belief of Invalidity Defense for Inducement in...more

29 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide