Settlement Agreements Involving Trademark Licenses: Important Terms to Be Included
May 31, 2006
In a recent decision involving a trademark settlement agreement, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in <i>Liberto v. D.F. Stauffer Biscuit Co., Inc.</i>, found that a final judgment in a trademark infringement action did not preclude a further action involving claims of trademark infringement, breach of contract, and the defense of incontestability. 441 F.3d 318 (5th Cir. 2006). The case highlights the significance of including certain important terms in a settlement agreement involving a trademark license.
Does Bankruptcy Absolve Patent Infringement Liability?
May 31, 2006
Your client spends considerable time, money, and energy pursuing an individual who is infringing his patent. Just when your client is about to have his day in court, the culprit files a petition for bankruptcy, triggering the automatic stay and stopping the infringement action in its tracks. Has the infringer escaped liability for his infringement, particularly when the bankruptcy court grants him a discharge? Not necessarily.
Admissibility of Settlement Communications in Patent Infringement Rule 11 Proceedings
May 31, 2006
Plaintiffs bringing patent infringement cases should ensure that they have made an adequate pre-filing inquiry as to the viability of their claims before initiating litigation. Without such an investigation, plaintiffs and their attorneys risk sanctions under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In the sanctions context, Rule 408 of the Federal Rules of Evidence does not protect settlement communications from admissibility.
Case Briefs
May 30, 2006
Highlights of the latest insurance cases from around the country.
Personal Injury Coverage: A Historical Perspective: The Duty to Defend False, Fraudulent, and Frivolous Claims
May 30, 2006
During recent years, personal and advertising injury coverage has been the subject of many court decisions. Often those decisions have involved questions of coverage for copyright infringement under the 'advertising injury' prong of the coverage. However, there has been a wide range of cases involving issues under the 'personal injury' prong of the coverage. In many of these cases, courts have focused on the current wording of the language, without reference to the historical background of the personal injury provisions. That background demonstrates the breadth of the coverage.
Does It Really Matter Who Pays?
May 30, 2006
After a liability insurance company denies coverage for a lawsuit filed against its policyholder, the policyholder is left to manage the defense and settlement of the lawsuit. Sometimes, the policyholder is forced to, or elects to, have another person or entity pay for the defense fees, settlement, or judgment. This leads to the inevitable question of whether the policyholder can recover from its liability insurer sums paid for defense fees, settlement, or judgment if, after the insurance company has wrongfully denied coverage, the policyholder's defense bills, settlement, or a judgment are paid for by a non-insured person or entity. While it should not matter who pays once a liability insurer has breached its contract, some courts have denied policyholders recoveries when a non-insured third-party steps in for the breaching liability insurer and pays the policyholder's defense fees, a settlement, or the judgment.
Verdicts
May 30, 2006
Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.