Subscribe: LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Intellectual Property Pleadings Legal News
http://feeds.feedburner.com/IntellectualPropertyPleadingsLegalNews
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade B rated
Language: English
Tags:
court review  court  high court  high  infringement  llc  owner  patent  review  supreme court  supreme  trademark  washington 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Intellectual Property Pleadings Legal News

LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Intellectual Property Pleadings Legal News



Headline Intellectual Property Pleadings Legal News from LexisNexis®



 



Inventors Oppose High Court's Review Over Use Of Prosecution History In Patent Claim Dispute
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Inventors accusing Google Inc. of infringing their patents for computer malware protection software argue in a Nov. 14 brief that the U.S. Supreme Court should not decide how the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals should use prosecution history to settle claim construction disputes because Google objects to fact-bound and case-specific conclusions (Google Inc. v. Alfonso Cioffi and The Estate of Allen Frank Rozman, No. 16-200, U.S. Sup.).



AstraZeneca Opposes High Court Answering If ANDA Subjects Filers To Personal Jurisdiction
WASHINGTON, D.C. - AstraZeneca AB argues in a Nov. 21 opposition brief that the U.S. Supreme Court should decline to answer whether the filing of an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) is sufficient to subject Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Mylan Inc. (collectively, Mylan) to specific personal jurisdiction in any state where they might market the drug (Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. v. Acorda Therapeutics Inc., et al. & Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. AstraZeneca AB, No. 16-360, U.S. Sup.).



Medical Device Company Opposes U.S. High Court Review Of Defense Of Laches In SCA
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A medical device company argues in a Nov. 14 opposition brief that the U.S. Supreme Court should not consider the extent to which the defense of laches may bar a claim for patent infringement nor should it stay a patent owner's petition pending resolution of SCA Hygiene Prods. Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Prods., LLC (136 S. Ct. 1824 [2016]) (Endotach LLC v. Cook Medical LLC, No. 16-127, U.S. Sup.).



Apotex Says To High Court: Amgen Gets To Reap Profits From Unfair Statutory Period
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. (collectively, Apotex) argue in a Nov. 21 reply brief to the U.S. Supreme Court that biotechnology companies that lost an underlying patent case unfairly get "to reap another six months of monopoly profits beyond the statutory 12-year period on a product that could help more people while saving the healthcare system billions of dollars in unnecessary expenditures" (Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. v. Amgen Inc. and Amgen Manufacturing Ltd., No. 16-332, U.S. Sup.).



Accused Patent Infringer Seeks High Court Review Of Statute Governing Venue In Patent Suit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a patent infringement case filed by Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, the accused patent infringer argues in a Nov. 21 reply brief that the U.S. Supreme Court should consider whether 28 U.S. Code Section 1400(b) is the sole and exclusive provision governing venue and is not to be supplemented by 28 U.S. Code Section 1391(c) (TC Heartland LLC d/b/a Heartland Food Products Group v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, No. 16-341, U.S. Sup.).



Trademark Owner Opposes U.S. High Court Review On Nominative Fair Use
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A trademark owner argues in a Nov. 18 opposition brief that the U.S. Supreme Court should not clarify the proper approach to nominative fair use because its lawsuit involves a certification mark infringement and not a trademark infringement (Security University LLC and Sondra Schneider v. International Information Systems Security Certification Consortium Inc., No. 16-352, U.S. Sup.).



Snap Fasteners Trademark Owner Tells High Court To Review Reduced Award
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A trademark owner of magnetic snap fasteners for handbags argues in a Nov. 1 reply brief that the U.S. Supreme Court should consider whether under Section 35 of the Lanham Act, willful infringement is a prerequisite for an award of infringer's profits that was reduced to $6.8 million (Romag Fasteners Inc. v. Fossil Inc., et al., No. 16-202, U.S. Sup.).



Newspaper Asks High Court To Decide Burden Of Proving Copyright Infringement Claim
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A newspaper organization in a Nov. 7 petition for writ of certiorari asks the U.S. Supreme Court to answer whether a plaintiff or a defendant has the burden of proving or disproving claims of copyright infringement over the distribution of a portrait of the Nation of Islam's leader, Louis Farrakhan (The Final Call Inc. v. Jesus Muhammad Ali, No. 16-647, U.S. Sup.).



PTO Director Tells Court To Uphold Ban On 'Racial Slurs' In Trademarks Suit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Citing the bar under the Lanham Act's 15 U.S. Code Section 1052(a) of the registration of trademarks that "disparage" people, Michelle K. Lee, undersecretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, argues in an opening brief filed Nov. 9 to the U.S. Supreme Court that there is a difference between a rule that restricts speech and one that refuses to endorse and promote it (Michelle K. Lee, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office v. Simon Shiao Tam, No. 15-1293, U.S. Sup.).



Reseller Cites Amicus Curiae Brief In Asking Court To Decide Patent Exhaustion Doctrine
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Citing an amicus curiae brief filed by the acting U.S. solicitor general, Impression Products Inc. argues in a Nov. 3 supplemental brief that the U.S. Supreme Court should review a patent case that poses the question of whether foreign sales exhaust a patent owner's right to sue, as well as whether patent owners can impose restrictions on the use of patented items to prevent an exhaustion of their rights (Impression Products Inc. v. Lexmark International Inc., No. 15-1189, U.S. Sup.).



Google, Motorola Ask High Court To Review Restriction Of 'Common Sense' Presumption
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Relying on KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (550 U.S. 398, 415 [2007]), Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court on Nov. 8 to review whether the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred in restricting the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's ability to rely on the common sense and common knowledge of skilled artisans to establish the obviousness of patent claims (Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC v. Arendi S.A.R.L., et al., No. 16-626, U.S. Sup.).



Pharm, Bio Tech Companies Ask High Court To Decide AIA's Institution Of Inter Partes Review
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and a biotechnology trade association in an amicus curiae brief filed Oct. 24 argue in support of the U.S. Supreme Court granting review on whether the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) permits the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) instead of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) director to make inter partes review (IPR) institution decisions (Ethicon Endo-Surgery Inc. v. Covidien LP and Michelle K. Lee, Director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, No. 16-366, U.S. Sup.).



Amgen Opposes Review Of Commercial Marketing Notice To Product Sponsor
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Amgen Inc. and Amgen Manufacturing Ltd. (collectively, Amgen) argue in a Nov. 8 opposition brief that the U.S. Supreme Court should decline to review whether the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred in holding that biosimilar applicants must provide a product sponsor with a notice of commercial marketing under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) (Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. v. Amgen Inc. and Amgen Manufacturing Ltd., No. 16-332, U.S. Sup.).



Patent Owner Seeks U.S. Supreme Court Review On Entry Of JMOL
WASHINGTON, D.C. - An owner of patents relating to two-way communications asks the U.S. Supreme Court in an Oct. 21 petition to answer whether the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred in ordering entry of judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) on a ground not presented in a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b) motion in the district court, "even though the ground presented a purely legal question" (Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. Silver Spring Networks Inc., No. 16-551, U.S. Sup.).



Importers Ask High Court To Decide ITC's Jurisdiction Reach On $6M Patent Fine
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Two importers argue in a Oct. 31 reply brief that the U.S. Supreme Court should consider whether the International Trade Commission's (ITC) jurisdiction over the importation of "articles that infringe" a patent extends to articles that do not infringe any patent (DBN Holding Inc. and BDN LLC v. International Trade Commission, No. 16-63, U.S. Sup.).



Flea Market Owner Seeks Review Of Aiding, Abetting Copyright Infringement Charge
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The owner of a flea market in an Oct. 11 petition asks the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether charges for aiding and abetting copyright infringement and counterfeit goods are unconstitutionally vague because they did not provide him "a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited" (Jack Frison v. United States of America, No. 16-506, U.S. Sup.).



Tech Company Seeks U.S. High Court Review Of ITunes Patent Challenge Under Cuozzo
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A tech company asks the U.S. Supreme Court in an Oct. 11 petition for a writ of certiorari to answer when a petition fails to give "sufficient notice" and what constitutes the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) acting outside its limits to permit judicial review under Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee (136 S. Ct. 2131 [2016]) (SightSound Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 16-483, U.S. Sup.).



Johnson & Johnson Unit Asks High Court To Review Expert Misconduct In Patent Dispute
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Johnson & Johnson Vision Care Inc. (JJVC) argues in an Oct. 7 petition for a writ of certiorari that the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred in allowing Rembrandt Vision Technologies LP a new trial over alleged infringement of its contact lens patent in a petition seeking consideration on a split over when an expert's false testimony should justify a new trial (Johnson & Johnson Vision Care Inc. v. Rembrandt Vision Technologies LP, No. 16-489, U.S. Sup.).



Drug Companies Ask High Court To Review Actavis Role In Patent, Antitrust Case
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Responding to the U.S. solicitor general's amicus curiae brief, drug companies argue in an Oct. 19 supplemental brief to the U.S. Supreme Court that they disagree with the solicitor's position that FTC v. Actavis (133 S. Ct. 2223 [2013]) is not limited to cash payments when answering whether a reverse-payment agreement is immune from antitrust scrutiny if the consideration given by the brand-name manufacturer to the generic challenger is a promise to restrict its competition with the challenger after the challenger enters the market (SmithKline Beecham Corp., et al. v. King Drug Company of Florence Inc., No. 15-1055, U.S. Sup.).



Commil Asks For Rehearing By High Court Of Review In Patent Suit In Light Of Ruling
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Following the U.S. Supreme Court's denial of certiorari in a dispute over the proper standard for disregarding or crediting the technical testimony of qualified experts when overturning a jury verdict of direct patent infringement, Commil USA LLC argues for a rehearing in an Oct. 25 petition in light of an en banc decision in Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co. (Nos. 2015-1171, -1195, -1994, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18225 [Fed. Cir. Oct. 7, 2016]) (Commil USA LLC v. Cisco Systems Inc., No. 15-1446, U.S. Sup.).



Pharmaceutical Company Seeks High Court Review In Trademark Dispute
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A pharmaceutical company in an Oct. 20 petition for writ of certiorari asks the U.S. Supreme Court to answer whether Sections 14(3) and 43(a) of the Lanham Act allow a foreign business that "has neither used nor registered its trademark in the United States to sue the owner of a U.S. trademark for conduct relating to the owner's use of its U.S. mark" (Belmora LLC and Jamie Belcastro v. Bayer Consumer Care AG, et al., No. 16-548, U.S. Sup.).



Retailers Ask High Court Not To Review Willfulness Infringement Prerequisite For Reduced Award
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court should not consider if willful infringement is a prerequisite for an award of infringer's profits reduced to $6.8 million to a trademark owner of magnetic snap fasteners for handbags, retailers argue in an Oct. 19 opposition brief, because every appellate court views willfulness "as an important factor, and the differences between them result in minimal inter-circuit variation" (Romag Fasteners Inc. v. Fossil Inc., et al., No. 16-202, U.S. Sup.).



Service Provider Says It Qualifies For Section 111 License In Copyright Suit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a copyright infringement action, a service provider argues in a Sept. 28 brief to the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that it qualifies for a license under Copyright Act Section 111 because it operates physical facilities that receive broadcast programming and then retransmits that programming over wires and other communications channels, including the internet, to paying subscribers (FilmOn X LLC, et al. v. Fox Television Stations Inc., et al., No. 16-7013, D.C. Cir.).



Music Companies Seek Dismissal Of Class Action On Copyright To Folk Song
NEW YORK - Music companies that claim ownership in the folk song "This Land Is Your Land" argue in an Oct. 10 reply brief that a New York federal court should dismiss a class action aimed at freeing the song for all to use because there is no subject matter jurisdiction (James Saint-Amour and Alena Ivleva a/k/a Jerra Blues, doing business as Satorii v. The Richmond Organization Inc. [TRO Inc.] and Ludlow Music Inc., No. 16-04464, S.D. N.Y.).