Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
District courts generally have broad discretion in determining what materials may be presented during trial, with evidentiary rulings reviewed for abuse of discretion. Consistent with this principle, the Federal Circuit has repeatedly confirmed that district courts’ discretion extends to the admissibility of evidence relating to post-grant proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). See, e.g., K-Tec, Inc. v. Vita-Mix Corp., 696 F.3d 1364, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (affirming district court’s decision to allow parties to discuss the extent to which Patent Office had considered a reference as within “the province of the district court”); Callaway Golf Co. v. Acushnet Co., 576 F.3d 1331, 1342–43 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (affirming district court’s exclusion of evidence of non-final reexamination determinations based on risk of jury confusion).
*May exclude premium content
By Stan Soocher
The significance of the U.S. Tax Court decision for celebrities and their estates is clear: Prior to now, as Tax Court Judge Mark V. Holmes noted: “We haven’t had a case directly addressing the taxability of the image and likeness.”
By Eric Alan Stone and Catherine Nyarady
In two recent cases, the Second Circuit provided guidance as to the circumstances that may give rise to liability for counterfeiting, as distinct from mere infringement, and addressed liability for contributory infringement for counterfeiting.
By Angela Morris
The Texas lawsuit alleged that the social video app and parent company ByteDance Ltd. copied software code, and deleted or altered copyright management information in the code, and then used the code in the app that has 175 million downloads.
By Howard Shire and Shaleen Patel
Federal Circuit Invalidates Parts of VoIP Patent