Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
Reissue applications may be quite useful. They may be useful in correcting some type of errors that one would normally think of as "errors" in the strict sense of the word. But they may also be used to correct "errors" in scope of patent protection and may thus be used to increase patent value and should thus be considered as a strategic tool in a patent holder's toolbox.
Columns & Departments
Federal Circuit Affirms District Court's Decision That an Artificial Intelligence Software System Cannot Be Listed as an Inventor on a Patent Application Federal Circuit Affirms District Court's Partial Award of Attorney's Fees
Features
A recent bankruptcy case from the District of Delaware underscores the need for a trademark licensor to be alert to filings made in its licensee's bankruptcy case that may require prompt action by the licensor to protect its valuable rights under a license agreement.
Features
University of Massachusetts v. L'Oréal Absent an express disclaimer or special definition of how a term is to be interpreted, it can be frustrating to get a court to reject the plain and ordinary meaning of claim language read in a vacuum, based on the subtleties of how a term is used in a patent or its prosecution history.
Features
On July 7, 2022, the Southern District of Florida denied a motion to dismiss in Morford v. Cattelan, which began by posing the following question: "Can a banana taped to a wall be art?"
Features
In the absence of a federal statutory scheme specifically aimed at digital advertising practices, the courts have focused on consumer-facing issues covered by existing law, such as privacy, transparency, and deceptive or misleading advertising practices. But digital advertising technology can also present new challenges in copyright and trademark protection.
Features
How far back from accrual of a claim may a plaintiff reach for copyright damages?
Columns & Departments
Copyright Standing and Fifth Circuit Trade Dress Factors
Features
In June 2021, the Supreme Court ruled in U.S. v. Arthrex that the statutory scheme appointing Patent Trial and Appeal Board administrative patent judges to adjudicate IPRs violates the appointments clause of the U.S. Constitution. Specifically, the Court concluded that because APJ decisions in IPR proceedings are not reviewable by a presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed officer, such determinations are not compatible with the powers of inferior officers. The PTO later decided that it would not accept requests for director review of institution decisions. This policy is now also being questioned in Arthrex's wake.
Features
The modifications brought by the Quebec's Bill 96 will have a far-reaching impact on how businesses use trademarks on product packaging, labelling, public signage and in commercial advertising. This article is Part One of a two-part series on Bill 96 and trademarks and covers the effects as they relate to product packaging and labelling and how best to comply with these new provisions.
