Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On Nov. 28, 2017, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued its opinion in Signature Mgmt. Team, LLC v. Doe, 876 F.3d 831 (6th Cir. 2017). The case involved a John Doe defendant’s effort to remain anonymous even after having been adjudicated liable for copyright infringement of plaintiff’s business training manual. John Doe argued that anonymity should be maintained since he offered protected speech under the First Amendment concomitant to infringing speech, even though plaintiff’s competing interest in enforcing its remedy would arguably be impeded. The instant case was not sui generis insofar as it concerned a John Doe defendant seeking to maintain anonymity based on Internet speech; these issues have been a hallmark of the Internet journalism age. However, the Sixth Circuit did break new ground in determining the limit of anonymity for copyright infringement post-judgment.
By Jonathan Moskin
NantKwest v Iancu
The Federal Circuit sitting en banc reversed its own prior ruling and held that “all expenses of the proceeding” does not include attorneys’ fees.
By Lawrence H. Aaronson and James L. Korenchan
Advances in UI Design Can Provide Key Competitive Differentiation and Advantage, Which Makes Protecting Them Critically Important from a Business Perspective
Advances in UI design can also provide key competitive differentiation and advantage, helping to distinguish otherwise commoditized products and services such as computers, Web services, wearables, and appliances. Given this advantage, protecting advances in UI design can also be critically important from a business perspective.
By Jeffrey S. Ginsberg and Abhishek Bapna
Federal Circuit Remands for Further Proceedings to Determine Whether RPX’s Petitions for IPR Were Time Barred For Failing to Identify Its Client As a ‘Real Party in Interest’
Federal Circuit Holds that Common Law Tribal Sovereign Immunity Cannot Shield a Patent in IPR Proceedings,br> Federal Circuit Holds that an Unsuccessful IPR Petitioner Must Show ‘Concrete Plans’ for Future Potentially-Infringing Activity in Order to Demonstrate Article III Standing to Appeal PTAB’s IPR Decision
By Elizabeth B. Hagan
The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that a patent owner may recover lost foreign profits for infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271(f)(2). The holding in WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical rejects the Federal Circuit’s categorical exclusion of lost profits damages for foreign sales, and expands the potential for increased damages from domestic competitors operating in foreign markets.