The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) issued the first precedential opinion of 2022 refusing registration of POTIFY and POTIFY (design) based on dilution by blurring of the mark SPOTIFY. The TTAB did not reach the alternate grounds of likelihood of confusion or dilution by tarnishment. Applicant sought registration in
On January 3, 2022, the Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed a Delaware ruling finding that a patent on a multibillion-dollar multiple sclerosis drug was not invalid and did have an adequate written description as to no-loading-dose and 0.5 mg daily dosage limitations despite the fact that
The Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) continues to define when a party has standing to appeal the final written decision of an inter partes review (“IPR”) proceeding from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). On December 28, 2021, the CAFC ruled in a pair of precedential decisions (Nos. 2020-1664 and 2020-1828)
Recently, the Second Circuit held that it was not fair use for an artist (“Andy Warhol”), who was licensed to create an artist reference for a 1984 Vanity Fair article based on an iconic photograph of Prince, to also create a 15-work series based on the iconic photograph. Andy Warhol
On November 24, 2021, the Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decision invalidating most of the claims of a patent on opioid addiction treatment because the amounts of compounds described in the patent and ranges listed in the claims were
Recently, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) took the rare opportunity to describe the pleading requirement as it relates to direct patent infringement. Plaintiff Bot M8 LLC (“Bot M8”) sued Sony Corp. of America (“Sony”) alleging that Sony’s products, including its Playstation 4 videogame console (the “PS4”),
In a 363-page final initial determination of a Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 1337), action, publicly released on October 13, 2021, Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) David P. Shaw addressed a number of arguments with respect to several patents owned by Overhead Door
The Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International continues to trip up patentees, as the Federal Circuit, (“CAFC”), and the District of Arizona invalidated two separate patents for claiming unpatentable subject matter last week. Cardionet involved U.S. Patent No. 7,099,715 (“the ’715 patent”), which was generally
The Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed an award of exceptional case attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 (“§ 285”) over Appellant Heat On-The-Fly (“HOTF”)’s arguments that the district court erred in failing to consider certain factual findings, and that it mis-weighed the strength of HOTF’s litigation positions and a purported lack of
On October 13, 2021, the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) held that any financial interest administrative patent judges (“APJs”) have in instituting AIA proceedings did not violate a patentee’s due process rights. Mobility Workx (“Mobility”) brought an infringement suit against T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless, shortly afterwards Unified Patents LLC (“Unified”) filed an
© 2021 Irwin IP LLC. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer | Sitemap | Cookie Policy
Attorney Advertising. The material and information contained on these pages and on any pages linked from these pages are intended to provide general information only and not legal advice. You should consult with an attorney licensed to practice in your jurisdiction before relying upon any of the information presented here. The acts of sending email to this website or viewing information from this website do not create an attorney-client relationship. The listing of verdicts, settlements, and other case results is not a guarantee or prediction of the outcome of any other claims.