The likelihood of confusion analysis is often focused on confusion at the time of purchase, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth and Federal Circuits permit mark holders to allege infringement based on presale, initial-interest confusion. Earlier this year, the Eighth Circuit joined the majority of circuits in permitting recovery for initial-interest confusion in certain circumstances.
the Tenth Circuit held that the Lanham Act can have extraterritorial application, if certain conditions are met. In doing so, the appellate court recognized — and further deepened — an ongoing circuit split.
Nike Seeks $150 Million In Sanctions from Six Chinese Banks, and Loses
To survive preemption under §301 of the Copyright Act, courts consider whether a state law claim in a lawsuit has an "extra element" that qualitatively distinguishes it from a federal copyright claim. Courts typically find that state law claims, such as breach of contract, have an extra element. Other state law claims, such as conversion, get varying court determinations as to whether they are preempted.
In the past year, the Federal Circuit has repeatedly required the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas to transfer patent infringement suits from that district to more convenient venues, and in doing so it has provided increasingly specific — and often pointed — guidance to courts and litigants on the appropriate analysis for transfer motions.
The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Unicolors v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz to address the following question: "Did the Ninth Circuit err in breaking with its own prior precedent and the findings of other circuits and the Copyright Office in holding that 17 U.S.C. §411 requires referral to the Copyright Office where there is no indicia of fraud or material error as to the work at issue in the subject copyright registration?"
The agency announced that the Department of Commerce has applied to register the USPTO's marks in a bid to crack down on scammers who are impersonating the agency.
Federal Circuit Clarifies Pleading Requirements for Patent Cases and Affirms Grant of Summary Judgment of Invalidity under 35 U.S.C. §101 Federal Circuit Holds that Pendency of Motions Unrelated to Interlocutory Judgment Does Not Toll 30-Day Limit to File Notice of Appeal
For the foreseeable future, patent applications involving artificial intelligence technologies will increase with the continued proliferation of such technologies. However, subject matter eligibility can be a significant challenge in securing patents on artificial intelligence and machine learning.
Nearly a century after endorsing the doctrine of assignor estoppel, the Court concluded that it applies "when, but only when, the assignor's claim of invalidity contradicts explicit or implicit representations he made in assigning the patent."
