<i>Pom v. Coke</i> Could Create a Juicy Precedent on Food Labels
February 28, 2014
Food companies will be watching closely a Supreme Court case this spring that could establish the fate of private causes of action challenging food labeling. While the case focuses on federal law, it also has implications for state causes of action. In particular, the class action bar has been prolific in its challenges to food labels, and this case could affect the future viability of such actions.
IP News
February 28, 2014
Supreme Court Overturns Burden-Shift in Non-Infringement Judgment <br>Federal Circuit Clarifies Rules for Patent Term Extension<br>Federal Circuit Confirms That All Members of a Priority Chain Must Recite Full Lineage
Supreme Court Grants <i>Cert</i> in <i>Aereo</i> Case
February 28, 2014
<i>Aereo</i>may turn out to be one of the most important copyright decisions since enactment of the Copyright Act of 1976, with potential wide-ranging ramifications for the television industry and the fast-growing cloud computing industry.
The Application of 365(n) to Cross-License Agreements
February 25, 2014
The Fourth Circuit's recent decision in <I>Jaffe v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.</I> has drawn attention to the integral role section 365(n) of the Bankruptcy Code plays in protecting the rights of non-debtor counterparties to patent cross-license agreements.
Federal Circuit Limits ITC's Indirect Patent Infringement Authority
January 31, 2014
On Dec. 13, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a landmark decision limiting the statutory authority of the International Trade Commission (ITC) to remedy indirect infringement, holding "that an exclusion order based on a violation of 19 U.S.C. '1337(a)(1)(B)(i) may not be predicated on a theory of induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. '271(b) where direct infringement does not occur until after importation of the articles the exclusion order would bar."
IP News
January 31, 2014
Federal Circuit Takes Hard Look at a More Permissive Standard for Fee-shifting <br>Federal Circuit Confirms that Prosecution History Estoppel Applies to Design Patents<br>FDCA Does Not Preempt State Unfair Competition Claims
<i>Soul Men</i> Ruling Shows Shift To Transformative Use Test
January 31, 2014
Celebrities often turn to the Lanham Act and state right of publicity laws to protect against exploitation of their name, image or voice in connection with the promotion of products or services. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently considered both Lanham Act and right of publicity claims in an action that pitted a Grammy winning musical artist against a major motion picture studio over the alleged use of the musician's likeness in a movie.
<i>LifeScan v. Shasta Tech </i>
December 31, 2013
The Federal Circuit panel discussed patent exhaustion in light of product claims, citing precedent where "the Supreme Court [has] repeatedly held, in addressing device patents, that the sale of a patented device exhausted the patent-holder's right to exclude, and that an infringement suit would not lie with respect to the subsequent sale or use of the device."
A Dangerous Undertaking
December 31, 2013
Oliver Wendell Holmes once wrote that "it would be a dangerous undertaking for persons trained only to the law to constitute themselves final judges of the worth of pictorial illustrations." If Holmes didn't think he could do it, which of us thinks we're up to the task? Nonetheless, this was just the challenge taken up by Judge Block of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York in <i>Cohen v. G&M Realty L.P.</i>
