Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Search

We found 1,384 results for "The Intellectual Property Strategist"...

IP News
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
In re Swanson: Reaffirming a Substantially Old Question
<b>In re Swanson</b> will likely have the effect of encouraging even more third-party ex parte re-examination requests, while only discouraging an applicant's incentive to perform a patent search to provide the best art to the PTO.
Veoh: Increased Protection for Service Providers, Or a Trapdoor?
The August 2008 ruling in <i>Io Group, Inc. v. Veoh Networks, Inc.</i>, has been widely heralded as a win for online service providers in the legal maelstrom surrounding social media.
Gripe Sites: Sue or Stew
Gripe sites are Web sites whose purpose is to complain, criticize, and revile businesses or other institutions. So, what to do.
January issue in PDF format
&#133;
IP News
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Attacking the Customer: Coercing Patent Infringers While Avoiding Exposure to DJ Actions
To avoid declaratory judgment actions, patent holders may opt to sue or threaten the purchasers of an allegedly infringing product, without threatening suit against the manufacturer. In effect, the patent holder coerces the manufacturing company to give up the right to manufacture or distribute the accused product by scaring off its customers. At what point does this activity create grounds for a declaratory judgment action by the manufacturer?
Proveris Scientific Corp. v. Innovasystems, Inc.: Federal Circuit Addresses 'Safe-Harbor' Immunity
In <i>Proveris Scientific Corp. v. Innovasystems, Inc.,</i> the Federal Circuit addressed whether the "safe-harbor" provision of the Hatch-Waxman Act applies to immunize infringement if the accused product is reasonably related to the development and submission of information to the FDA for regulatory approval purposes.
The Federal Circuit Attempts to Right the Inequitable Conduct Ship
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has long maintained a high bar for proving inequitable conduct. This high bar is appropriate given the severity of the remedy &mdash; unenforceability of the entire patent &mdash; and the relative ease of using hindsight to find fault with the prosecution of a patent. Several recent decisions, however, have pointed toward a sinking standard for proving inequitable conduct, which has created an atmosphere of uncertainty about the proper scope of the inequitable conduct defense. The Federal Circuit's recent opinion on the subject, <i>Star Scientific, Inc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.,</i> appears to be an attempt to right the ship by reiterating the standards for proving inequitable conduct that were established more than 20 years ago.
December issue in PDF format
&#133;

MOST POPULAR STORIES