H.R. 3309 – The Innovation Act On December 5, 2013, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 3309, the “Innovation Act”, with bipartisan support by an overwhelming margin of 325-91 votes. H.R. 3309 was drafted to address the perceived growing problem of abusive patent litigation attributed to alleged “patent trolls.” Early next year, the Senate will likely consider a companion bill, S. […] Continue Reading →
Federal Judicial Center – Hot Topics in Patent Litigation The Federal Judicial Center recently released a Webinar entitled “Hot Topics in Patent Litigation: Actavis, Hatch-Waxman and the Biosimilars Act.” The Webinar focused on recent developments in areas regarding enforcement of patents in the life science area, generic drugs, and generic biologics. The entire webinar is available here; the following are brief highlights: Hatch-Waxman Patent […] Continue Reading →
Unitary Patent – The New European Patent Regime Starting in 2014, the European Union will provide another option for obtaining patent protection throughout the European Union and a more streamlined approach to enforcing or invalidating patents throughout the EU. In 2012 the European Parliament and European Council approved the “EU unitary patent package,” which establishes the European Unitary Patent and the Unified European […] Continue Reading →
USPTO Proposes Rule Changes for International Design Applications The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is seeking comments on it proposed rules for implementing the provisions of Title I of the Patent Law Treaties Implementation Act of 2012. The law is the implementing legislation for the 1999 Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs (“the Hague Agreement”). The […] Continue Reading →
Flawed Evidence Undercuts “Charbucks” Trademark Suit In Starbucks Corp. v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision denying injunctive relief in Starbucks’ trademark case against Black Bear Micro Roastery over Black Bear’s use of “Charbucks” for coffee. Starbucks sued Black Bear in 2001, alleging, among other things, trademark dilution in […] Continue Reading →
Exhausting Patent Rights Without a “Sale” InLifeScan Scotland, LTD v. Shasta Technologies, LLC, the Federal Circuit clarified the ability of a patnet holder to enforce patent rights in a product it has given away, but not "sold." Defendant Shasta Technologies appealed from a decision of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California granting LifeScan Scotland a preliminary […] Continue Reading →
New and Useful – August 26, 2013 · InUniversity of Utah v. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, the Federal Circuit held that a patent lawsuit between a state university and the officers of another state university is not a controversy between two states. The case began when the University of Utah (“UUtah”) sued the Max Planck Institute and the University of Massachusetts (“UMass”) to correct inventorship […] Continue Reading →
Supplier’s Agreement to Manufacture May Trigger On-Sale Bar In an Opinion on August 14, 2013 (Hamilton Beach Brands, Inc. v. Sunbeam Products, Inc.), the Federal Circuit ruled that the on-sale bar was triggered when a purchase order for slow cookers by patentee Hamilton Beach was confirmed by its supplier. The Court stated that Hamilton Beach’s transaction with its supplier was an offer for […] Continue Reading →
The Role of DVRs in Copyright Infringement InFox Broadcasting v. Dish Network, Fox Broadcasting Company ("Fox") appealed a ruling by the District Court of Central District of California that Fox did not demonstrate a likelihood of success on most of its copyright infringement and breach of contract claims, and that Fox was not entitled to a preliminary injunction against Dish Network. The […] Continue Reading →
Contract Enforceability Beyond Patent Term InKimble v. Marvel Enterprises, the plaintiff patent owner appealed the United States District Court for the District of Arizona's decision to not extend royalty payments beyond the life of a licensed patent. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the lower court's decision. In December 1990, Kimble met with an officer […] Continue Reading →