Intellectual Property Law

Fourth Circuit Finds No Dilution in Chewy Vuiton Case

Posted on November 16, 2007
Case: Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC, Case No. 06-2267, Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (November 13, 2007)The One Sentence Summary: The Fourt Circuit found no dilution by "Chewy Vuiton" of the famous LOUIS VUITTON mark, construing the Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006 (TDRA) to hold that parody may be considered in determining whether dilution by blurring has occurred...

Patent Did Not Adequately Incorporate Ancestor Patent to Avoid Anticipation

Posted on November 09, 2007
Case: Zenon Environmental, Inc. v. US Filter Corp., Fed. Cir. No. 2006-1266, 2006-1267 (11/7/07)The One Sentence Summary: A water filter patent was invalid and anticipated where it was not entitled to the priority date of an ancestor patent when the intervening patents failed to incorporate by reference the necessary details of the ancestor patent...

ICANN Defers Action on WHOIS Database

Posted on November 06, 2007
A controversial proposal to limit access to information about domain name owners was tabled by a committee of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). The committee voted on October 30, 2007 to defer implementing policy changes that could eliminate or otherwise limit access to some or all of the data on domain name owners that is currently available to the public on the WHOIS database...

Doctrine of Equivalents Could Be Used to Expand Concentration Range in Patent Claims

Posted on November 02, 2007
Case: US Philips Corp. v. Iwasaki Elec. Co. Ltd., Fed. Cir. No. 2007-1117 11/2/07)The One Sentence Summary: The doctrine of equivalents could allow a jury to determine that a concentration of halogens in a lamp was close enough to a concentration range stated in the claims...

To access this complete feed in the blog feed reader login or register for free.

Assertion of Patent with Defective Title Was Not an Exceptional Case for Award of Attorneys' Fees

Posted on November 02, 2007
Case: Digeo, Inc. v. Audible, Inc., Fed. Cir. No. 2007-1133 (11/1/07)The One Sentence Summary: The district court did not err in refusing to grant an award of attorneys' fees under 35 U.S.C. section 285 where there was not clear and convincing evidence that the plaintiff should have known of the defects in title of the patent that it asserted, and district court did not need to allow discovery into the issue...

Corporations Must Limit Distribution of Advice to Maintain Attorney-Client Privilege

Posted on October 26, 2007
In this post, guest blogger M. Kay Martin describes a recent California appellate court opinion illustrating what corporations must to do avoid waiving attorney client privilege.The decision, Zurich American, holds that in order to avoid waiver, corporations should limit distribution of attorney advice, opinions and strategy to those who ?need to know,? and recipients should be cautioned not to indiscriminately forward the document to others who may not fall within that description...

Taking of Correspondence and Bid Information Needed for Time Sensitive Construction Projects Allows Trade Secret Claims to Proceed to Trial

Posted on October 17, 2007
Case: San Jose Construction, Inc. v. S.B.C.C., Inc., (Cal. App. 6th Distr. No. H031066 10/12/07)The One Sentence Summary: A project manager's taking of binders of correspondence and bids for time sensitive construction projects created questions of fact requiring a trial on trade secret, interference with prospective economic advantage and unfair competition claims by the former employer against the new employer...

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board No Substitute for Federal Court When Infringement Action is Threatened

Posted on October 16, 2007
Case: Rhoades v. Avon Products, Inc., Case No. 05-56047 (9th Cir. 10/15/07)The One Sentence Summary: Allegations of threats sufficient to create "reasonable apprehension" of an infringement suit stated an actual controversy for purposes of declaratory judgment jurisdiction and plaintiffs were not required to wait for the completion of Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) proceedings before seeking declaratory relief...

Northern District of California Considering Changes to Its Local Patent Rules

Posted on October 13, 2007
At the Northern District of California's annual Patent Law Roundtable held on October 2, 2007, a panel including judges Marilyn Hall Patel, Ronald Whyte, Susan Illston, and Elizabeth Laporte discussed patent law developments. One of the items discussed was an effort to revise the Northern District's local rules for patent cases...

Northern District of California Adopts Revised Model Jury Instructions for Patent Cases

Posted on October 13, 2007
The Northern District of California has adopted revised model jury instructions for patent cases. The instructions reflect recent developments in patent cases including the changes in obviousness law from the Supreme Court's KSR decision.

Summary Judgment of Noninfringement Reversed Where Defendants Challenged Only Precision, and Not Validity, of Testing Methods

Posted on October 12, 2007
Case: Warner-Lambert Co. v. Purepac Pharmaceutical Co., Case No. 2006-1572 (Fed. Cir. 9/21/07)The One Sentence Summary: Summary judgment of noninfringement was reversed where the Federal Circuit, while affirming the district court's claim construction, rejected defendants' arguments which had focused on the precision of testing methods, rather than validity, to support findings of noninfringement...

Former Employer Who Disclaimed Interest in Former Employee's Patent Was Not a Necessary Party

Posted on October 12, 2007
Case: IpVenture, Inc. v. Prostar Computer, Inc. (Fed. Cir. No. 2006-1012, 2006-1081 9/28/07)The Two Sentence Summary: The district court erred in dismissing a former HP employee's patent claim where HP had disclaimed all interest in the patent despite an employee agreement requiring assignment of inventions...

Claims for Mental Processes for Resolving Disputes by Arbitration Were Unpatentable

Posted on September 26, 2007
Case: In re Comiskey, No. 2006-1286 (Fed. Cir. 9/20/07)The One Sentence Summary: Claims for a method of submitting disputes to arbitration were unpatentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 when they were no more than mental processes, but the addition of a computer and communication devices to such claims was remanded to the PTO for whether the addition of these devices was obvious.

Ninth Circuit Rejects ?Trademark Disparagement? As A Cause of Action Under The Lanham Act

Posted on September 26, 2007
Case: Freecycle Network, Inc. v. Oey, No. 06-16219 (9th Cir. 9/26/07)The One Sentence Summary: Plaintiff?s preliminary injunction preventing defendant ?from making any comments that could be construed as to disparage upon [plaintiff's] possible trademark and logo? was vacated because defendant?s actions were not a ?use in commerce,? created no likelihood of confusion, and did not disparage plaintiff?s products or services; and to the extent the injunction was based on a ?trademark disparagement? claim under the Lanham Act, the district court abused its discretion because no such cause of action exists under the Act...

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.