‘ANY’ Person Has Standing for False Marking Claim in Use
Stauffer v Brooks Brothers, Inc., Nos 2009-1428, -1430, -1453, US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2010 US App. LEXIS 18144, 31 August 2010. Abstract Violation of the statute is sufficient to state a false patent-marking claim under 35 USC §292 for a qui tam action in the US. Legal Context Last December, the […]
US Federal Circuit Narrows Patent Misuse Doctrine as a Defence to Patent Infringement
Princo Corp. v ITC, No. 2007-1386, 2010 US App. LEXIS 18101, US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 30 August 2010 (en banc) (‘Princo II’) Abstract A patent misuse defence requires more than a mere allegation of anticompetitive conduct. Legal context The patent misuse defence, a judicially created doctrine in US patent law, seeks […]
“America Thrives on Competition; Barbie … will too”
Mattel, Inc. v MGA Entertainment, Inc., Nos. 09-55673, 09-55812, 2009 US App. LEXIS 29187, US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 22 July 2010. Abstract An overly broad constructive trust for the Bratz marks was overturned due to an improper ruling on summary judgment regarding the meaning of an employment agreement and other errors. […]
A Primer On Spotting IP Issues Associated with Social Media Websites and Content
Most businesspeople and generalists understand that social media can be an important but risky part of doing business. This article seeks to identify how to spot potential intellectual property law issues associated with social media websites and content that can arise for a company. I. Common Aspects of Social Media Websites There are certain fundamental […]
US Supreme Court Returns Patent-Eligibility Test to Fundamental Principles
Abstract The ‘machine-or-transformation’ test is no longer the only test for determining patent eligibility of processes in the United States. Legal context In a Current Intelligence published in January 2009 I reported on the en banc decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in In re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943 (Fed. […]
Same Word, Different Meanings
HaemoneticsCorp. v Baxter Healthcare Corp., No. 2009-1557, 2010 US App. LEXIS 11122, US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2 June 2010 (‘Haemonetics II’) Abstract The term ‘centrifugal unit’ is held to have different meanings in different claims of the same patent, based on the context of each claim. Legal context It is axiomatic […]
Tips For Drafting And Prosecuting Patent Applications After Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. ___ (2010)
Tips For Drafting And Prosecuting Patent Applications After Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. ___ (2010) By Charles R. Macedo, Partner, Amster, Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP As a result of Bilski v. Kappos, 561 US __, 70 USLW 4802, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 5521 (June 28, 2010) (“Bilski III”), the breadth of patent-eligible subject matter remains broad […]
Nine Opportunities for Federal Circuit Guidance on Patents Post-Bilski
Click here to view the article. – Weblog entry, Legal Pulse, 26 Jul 2010
The Nuts And Bolts Of The Bilski Decision
IP Law360, New York (June 30, 2010) — On June 28, 2010 — the last day possible for the Term — the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much awaited decision on patent-eligible subject matter in Bilski v. Kappos, No. 08-964, 561 U.S. ____ Slip Opinion (2010) (“Bilski III”). In Bilski III, Justice Anthony Kennedy writing […]
Us Trademark Owners Must Police Their Own Marks On eBay
Tiffany (NJ) Inc. v eBay, Inc., No. 08-3947-cv, 600 F.3d 93, 2010 US App. LEXIS 6735, US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 1 April 2010 Abstract eBay is found not liable for infringing Tiffany’s trade mark through the sale of both authentic and counterfeit items on its website, although eBay may be subject […]