Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
In <i>Matal v. Tam</i>, the trademark case involving the name of the Asian-American rock band The Slants, the SCOTUS held that the portion of §2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1052(a), that prohibits the federal registration of potentially disparaging trademarks and service marks, violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
Features
In <i>Matal v. Tam,</i> the SCOTUS held that a portion of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1052(a), prohibiting the federal registration of potentially disparaging trademarks and service marks, violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
Features
The Supreme Court sparked a seismic shift in patent litigation recently when it upset the long-standing interpretation of 28 U.S.C. §1400(b), the special patent venue statute. TC Heartland held that for the purposes of patent venue, the meaning of "resides" in Section 1400(b) is not supplemented by the broad definition of "resides" in the general venue provision, 28 U.S.C. §1391.
Features
The Third Circuit has adopted McCarthy's "ownership" test in determining whether a manufacturer or distributor owns a trademark in the absence of an express agreement between the parties.
Columns & Departments
Federal Circuit Vacated The Denial of an Injunction Because a Causal Nexus for Multi-Feature Products Only Requires a Feature to be 'A Driver' of Demand<br>District Court Abused Discretion In Denying Attorneys' Fees, Where Plaintiff Continued to Litigate After Markman Order Made Its Position Untenable
Features
Patent owners have taken control of the patent reform debate in the 115th Congress, but it's not clear yet who's supposed to be listening.
Features
Since 2007, the development of the musical has been the source of protracted litigation that reached its latest stage in June 2017.
Features
<b><i>Supreme Court Turns Back Clock</b></i><p>Although <i>TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods </i> answers the question of where a domestic corporation resides in patent infringement cases, it does not fully answer the question of where proper venue lies.
Columns & Departments
Federal Circuit Affirms Non-Infringement Decision Based on Prosecution Disclaimer<br>Federal Circuit Decisions Offer Guidance on Award of Attorney Fees under Section 285
Features
The Supreme Court's decision in <i>Impression Products v. Lexmark</i> is the latest Supreme Court ruling to eviscerate years-long, patentee-friendly Federal Circuit precedent.