Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Supreme Court's decision in Festo has been hailed by many as being one of the most significant cases to impact the patent system. Festo Corp. v. Shoektsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., Ltd., 122 S.Ct. 1831 (2002). Some say that more significant than Festo is Johnson, in which the Federal Circuit held that subject matter disclosed but not claimed in a patent cannot be covered by the doctrine of equivalents. See Johnson & Johnston Associates Inc. v. R.E. Service Co., 285 F.3d 1046 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (en banc).
The claims at issue in Johnson are directed to a disposable substrate for use in manufacturing articles such as printed circuit boards. The specification says the substrate can be made of aluminum, stainless steel, nickel alloy, or polypropylene. In the claims, the substrate is made of aluminum. The alleged infringers used steel. The district court found that the defendants infringed under the doctrine of equivalents and that such infringement was willful. The Federal Circuit then reversed, holding that because the patentee disclosed but did not claim steel as a substrate, steel had been “dedicated to the public” and therefore could not be construed as an equivalent to aluminum.
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.