Initial thoughts on Microsoft v. AT&T, a.k.a. Deepsouth: the sequel In what could be termed a sequel to the Supreme Court's 1972 decision in Deepsouth Packing Co. v. Laitram Corp., the Court again found that if U.S. patent law is to extend its reach further into foreign acts, it must be Congress, not the courts, that extends it. The Court held that Microsoft's act of […] Continue Reading →
Supreme Court reverses both KSR and Microsoft As reported at SCOTUS Blog, the Supreme Court has today ruled in two cases, reversing decisions of the Federal Circuit. The first came in KSR v. Teleflex, where the Court has apparently ruled 9-0 that the Federal Circuit's view on obviousness is too narrow, reversing the decision that Teleflex's invention was nonobvious. Previous coverage of […] Continue Reading →
Compulsory patent licenses for AIDS drugs: the beginning of an international trend? The global concern over the spread of AIDS, particularly in developing countries, is prompting some countries to take action to make patented drugs more accessible to its citizens. Earlier this year, Thailand decided to "break," or require a compulsory license to, the patent for Efavirenz, marketed as Sustiva® and Stocrin®, patented by Merck (Orange Book […] Continue Reading →
Patent Examiner groups air their grievances In an open letter to the heads of the United States, European, Canadian, German, and Austrian patent offices, an international coalition of patent examiner groups seeks changes in the demands on patent examiners, stating that the increase in productivity demands and the number of applications to be examined, combined with the increased complexity of applications […] Continue Reading →
USPTO changes address for Madrid Protocol applications and related papers In a Federal Register notice today, the USPTO announced that it has changed its address for international trademark applications under the Madrid Protocol and related correspondence. The full list of affected papers includes: International applications under § 7.11, subsequent designations under § 7.21, responses to notices of irregularity under § 7.14, requests to record changes […] Continue Reading →
Splenda leaves a bitter taste in competitors’ mouths The business may be all about sweetness, but the competition can be bitter. That's the story right now in the artificial sweetener business, with much of the action centered around sucralose, the sweetener in Splenda®. The sweetener is the subject of several currently pending cases. In the first, rival sweetener maker Merisant, maker of Equal® […] Continue Reading →
India’s Union Cabinet approves accession to Madrid Protocol Today, India’s Union Cabinet approved India’s accession to the Madrid Protocol, the international treaty relating to registration of trademarks. The next step will be introduction of Bill in India’s Parliament to finalize the accession and to amend India’s trademark laws to include the requirements of the Madrid Protocol. The Madrid Protocol permits trademark applicants to […] Continue Reading →
Starbucks loses Korean appeal, Starpreya can continue to use name there The Korean Supreme Court today denied an appeal by Starbucks to cancel a rival's trademark there. Specifically, the Court noted that Starbucks was not well-known in Korea when the rival coffee provider (who uses a similar logo) registered its trademark. MVS previously blogged about the appeal here. This case, along with the ongoing saga between […] Continue Reading →
Anheuser-Busch and Budvar reach agreement, but trademark fights continue United States brewer Anheuser-Busch, maker of Budweiser beer, has reached an agreement with Czech brewer Budejovicky Budvar, to distribute Budvar's Czechvar lager. This agreement is interesting because the two companies have been involved in trademark disputes around the world over which company has the right to use the name "Budweiser." Budvar's beer is sold as […] Continue Reading →
Starbucks appeals denial of cancellation of Korean company’s trademark Starbucks is appealing a decision denying cancellation of a Korean company's trademark, asserting it infringes Starbucks' trademark. The Korean company, Starpreya, uses a green circular logo that Starbucks asserts is confusingly similar to its logo. Below are the two logos: Starbucks has already unsuccessfully opposed Starpreya's mark in two cases before the Patent Court of […] Continue Reading →