Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Features

Whether to Cancel National Trademark Registrations in Favor of a CTM

Matthew W. Siegal & Stephen A. Fefferman

Why maintain national trademark registrations in Europe? Your biggest client, the hypothetical Copsi-Cola, Inc., a U.S. beverage manufacturer, with a 95-year-old U.S. trademark registration for the popular POWERSWEET drink, a high-sugar soda, is attempting to expand its trademark rights in the European market and needs your advice. Copsi-Cola has also owned registrations in three of the 15 European Union ("EU") member countries for more than 50 years: France, Spain and Portugal. Copsi-Cola has begun market research in advance of selling its POWERSWEET drink in five more EU member countries, including the United Kingdom, Germany and the Benelux countries, and has asked you to file applications in the national trademark offices in those countries. Copsi-Cola also wants the option of using its mark in all EU member countries.

Features

Study: Forget the 'Blockbusters'

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

A study whose results were reported December 8 asserts that the pharmaceutical industry's "blockbuster" approach to developing new drugs is no longer viable in today's marketplace.

Canadian Pharmaceutical Agency Wants Ban on Exports to U.S.

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

The Canadian National Association of Pharmacy Regulatory Authorities (NAPRA), Canada's voluntary umbrella association of provincial and territorial pharmacy licensing bodies, has asked the Canadian government to legislate against the export of drug products to the United States.

OK to Use 'Research Tool' Patents Offshore?

Harold Wegner & Stephen Maebius

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has confirmed that there is no patent infringement liability under 35 U.S.C. 271(g)(1) for the offshore use of a "research tool" patent when only the information gained from such offshore use is introduced into the United States.

Case Briefing

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.

Features

News from the FDA

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

The latest news you need to know.

Features

Patent Protection or <i>Per Se</i> Antitrust Violation?

Neal R. Stoll & Shepard Goldfein

As the winter months approached, a storm was brewing in the antitrust world. The U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Sixth and Eleventh circuits have split over the per se illegality of Hatch-Waxman patent-settlement agreements by which a patent-holding drug maker pays a generic drug company to delay its entry into the market. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has harshly criticized these agreements, and now the Supreme Court has an opportunity to calm the fury.

Features

Landlord & Tenant

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent rulings of importance to your practice.

Development

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent rulings of importance to your practice.

Features

Real Property Law

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent rulings of interest to your practice.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Surveys in Patent Infringement Litigation: The Next Frontier
    Most experienced intellectual property attorneys understand the significant role surveys play in trademark infringement and other Lanham Act cases, but relatively few are likely to have considered the use of such research in patent infringement matters. That could soon change in light of the recent admission of a survey into evidence in <i>Applera Corporation, et al. v. MJ Research, Inc., et al.</i>, No. 3:98cv1201 (D. Conn. Aug. 26, 2005). The survey evidence, which showed that 96% of the defendant's customers used its products to perform a patented process, was admitted as evidence in support of a claim of inducement to infringe. The court admitted the survey into evidence over various objections by the defendant, who had argued that the inducement claim could not be proven without the survey.
    Read More ›
  • In the Spotlight
    On May 9, 2003, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts announced that Bayer Corporation, the pharmaceutical manufacturer, had been sentenced and ordered to pay a criminal fine of $5,590,800 stemming from its earlier plea of guilty to violating the Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act by failing to list with the FDA its drug product, Cipro, that was privately labeled for an HMO. Such listing is required under the federal Food, Drug &amp; Cosmetic Act. The Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act, Pub. L. 100-293, enacted on April 22, 1988, as modified on August 26, 1992 by the Prescription Drug Amendments (PDA) Pub. L. 102-353, 106 Stat. 941, amended sections 301, 303, 503, and 801 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, codified at 21 U.S.C. '' 331, 333, 353, 381, to establish requirements for distributing prescription drug samples.
    Read More ›