Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Hakim v. Cannon Avent Group: What's the Spillover?
Your client Su Co., a manufacturer of non-spill sippie cups, calls you with a problem regarding a patent application for which you recently secured allowance on its behalf. The Patent and Trademark Office had approved the application after you amended the original claims to describe that two specific parts are joined together and argued that some very close prior art lacked that feature. With that patent in hand, your client had eagerly looked forward to shutting down various competitors who were, in your client's view, infringing its rights.
Su Co. now informs you that the allowed claims would not literally cover a competitor's knock-off cup that associates the parts, but does not physically join them together. 'Not to worry,' you tell Su Co, 'we can file a continuation application with slightly broader claims that avoid the prior art while still covering the competitor's product.'
Not wanting it to look like you are trying to pull a fast one, you point out to the examiner where you have broadened the claims and succinctly state that the claims remain patentable for the same reasons as argued in the prior amendment in the prior application. You also request that the examiner review each reference to confirm that the amended claims are still patentable. Have you done all that is necessary to broaden your claims? After the Federal Circuit's decision in Hakim v. Cannon Avent Group, PLC, 479 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2007), the answer is 'Not necessarily.'
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?