Subscribe: LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Intellectual Property Pleadings Legal News
http://www.lexisnexis.com/mealeys/rss/legalnews_intellectualpropertypleadings.xml
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade B rated
Language: English
Tags:
court review  court  high court  llc  oct  patent  review  supreme court  supreme  trademark office  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®



 



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.).



Blood Glucose System Maker Asks High Court To Decide Who Institutes Inter Partes Review
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A manufacturer of a blood glucose monitoring system on Sept. 20 petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) permits the Patent Trial and Appeal Board instead of the director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to make inter partes review (IPR) institution decisions (LifeScan Scotland Ltd. v. Pharmatech Solutions Inc. and Michelle K. Lee, Director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, No. 16-377, U.S. Sup.).



Patent Owner Asks High Court To Decide If AIA Allows Board To Institute Inter Partes Review
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A patent owner petitions the U.S. Supreme Court on Sept. 20 to answer whether the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) permits the Patent Trial and Appeal Board 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.).



Solicitor Says U.S. Supreme Court Should Deny Petition In Patent, Antitrust Case
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A petition by drug manufacturers asking the U.S. Supreme Court to consider "whether a reverse-payment agreement is immune from antitrust scrutiny if the consideration given by the brand-name manufacturer to the generic challenger is not a cash payment, but rather a promise to restrict its competition with the challenger after the challenger enters the market" should be denied, the U.S. solicitor general says in an Oct. 3 amicus curiae brief (SmithKline Beecham Corp., et al. v. King Drug Company of Florence Inc., No. 15-1055, U.S. Sup.).



Amicus Curiae Filer Supports Supreme Court Question On Statute Governing Patent Venue
WASHINGTON, D.C. - An amicus curiae filer argues in an Oct. 5 amicus curiae brief in support of TC Heartland LLC's petition that the U.S. Supreme Court should resolve the governing provision for a venue transfer dispute in a patent infringement lawsuit (TC Heartland LLC d/b/a Heartland Food Products Group v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, No. 16-341, U.S. Sup.).



Music Publishers Ask High Court To Reject Petition On Fair Use In Copyright Dispute
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Music publishers argue in a Sept. 26 opposition brief to the U.S. Supreme Court that it should not consider whether a YouTube user is excused from liability under Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) because the user lacks standing to make her claim of a good faith belief that her video was protected under the fair use doctrine (Stephanie Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., et al., Nos. 16-217 & 16-218, U.S. Sup.).



Amylin Says To Supreme Court: Decision On Limitations Period Does Not Conflict With Petrella
WASHINGTON, D.C. - An appellate court's decision that a copyright complaint must be dismissed for falling outside the three-year statute of limitations proscribed by the Copyright Act does not conflict with Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc. (134 S. Ct. 1962, 1969 [2014]), Amylin Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Amylin Pharmaceuticals LLC (Amylin, collectively) argue in a Sept. 30 brief to the U.S. Supreme Court (Consumer Health Information Corp. v. Amylin Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al., No. 16-282, U.S. Sup.).



9th Circuit Hears Arguments From Skechers, Adidas Over Injunction In Trademark Suit
SAN FRANCISCO - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct. 7 heard oral arguments from Skechers USA Inc. and adidas America Inc. as to whether there was evidence of irreparable harm to support an injunction barring Skechers from selling two shoes that allegedly infringed on adidas' brand (adidas America Inc., et al. v. Skechers USA Inc., No. 16-35204, 9th Cir.).



Ex-Band Member Argues Email Blasts Did Not Violate Injunction Under 'Fair Use'
ORLANDO, Fla. - Email blasts for advertisements that include a musician's use of his former band's name do not violate a permanent injunction in a trademark lawsuit because of "fair use," the ex-band member argues in a Sept. 30 opposition brief in Florida federal court (Commodores Entertainment Corp. v. Thomas McClary and Fifth Avenue Entertainment LLC, No. 14-01335, M.D. Fla.).