Features
The Federal Arbitration Act
The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in <i>Hall Street Associates, L. L. C. v. Mattel, Inc.</i> had long been anticipated by the litigation and arbitration communities and has been the subject of extensive commentary and debate in the brief period since it was rendered. This article explains why.
What the Insurance Industry Doesn't Want You to Know
Many companies give away their coverage for IP claims because they accept their insurers' self-serving assessment that coverage does not exist. This article provides an overview of the issues that typically arise when determining the extent of coverage for IP claims under advertising injury coverage.
Employers Must Bolster Their Policies Against Retaliation
Even in the absence of discrimination itself, juries often find employers guilty of retaliation with no more evidence than the short time between the employee's complaint and the alleged retaliatory act. Here's what to do.
Features
A Creative Screening of Electronically Stored Information May Determine the Victor
Electronically stored information ('ESI') is not an issue that can be put on the back burner and dealt with in a piecemeal fashion after litigation ensues. The painful results of such an approach were the subject of Magistrate Judge Grimm's recent decision in <i>Victor Stanley, Inc. v. Creative Pipe, Inc., et al.</i>
Features
Practice Tip: The Learned Intermediary Doctrine
The court's refusal in <i>Johnson & Johnson v. Karl</i>, to recognize the learned intermediary doctrine and rejection of it wholesale lacks a sound basis. It is a legal aberration that warrants a prompt legislative response to codify the learned intermediary doctrine in West Virginia.
Features
Rambus: Clarification of IP Disclosure Rules in Standard Setting
In a case closely watched by intellectual property holders, the D.C. Circuit has provided new guidance on the potential antitrust consequences of the failure to disclose patent rights during a standard setting proceeding.
Quanta: Supreme Court Expands the Scope of Exhaustion; Redefines Licensing Principles
The Supreme Court's recent unanimous decision in <i>Quanta Computer, Inc., et. al. v. LG Electronics, Inc.</i>, expands the scope of the patent exhaustion doctrine and redefines an area of patent law that had been subject to considerable confusion for decades.
Features
<i>adidas v. Payless</i>
After almost seven years since inception, the lawsuit by adidas against Payless ShoeSource, Inc. ended at the trial level with a jury verdict against Payless in the amount of $305 million. Payless was found guilty of willful federal trademark and trade dress infringement, trademark and trade dress dilution, and state-law unfair and deceptive trade practices as a result of its sale of footwear bearing confusingly similar imitations of adidas's famous Three-Stripe Mark and Superstar Trade Dress.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Meet the Lawyer Working on Inclusion Rider LanguageAt the Oscars in March, Best Actress winner Frances McDormand made “inclusion rider” go viral. But Kalpana Kotagal, a partner at Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll had already worked for months to write the language for such provisions. Kotagal was developing legal language for contract provisions that Hollywood's elite could use to require studios and other partners to employ diverse workers on set.Read More ›
- Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent TrollsWith trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.Read More ›
- From the PTO to the FDA: What to Consider When Branding Clinical TrialsThe legal implications of branding generally arise initially for companies during the process of selecting a company name and any initial product or service names. For drug development companies, however, careful consideration should also be paid to the implications of branding a clinical trial.Read More ›
- Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel'Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel is a continuation of the discussion of client expectations and the disconnect that often occurs. And although the outside attorneys should be pursuing how inside-counsel actually think, inside counsel should make an effort to impart this information without waiting to be asked.Read More ›