IP News
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
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>
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
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>
Seveth Circuit Upholds Cracker Barrel Injunction
When Cracker Barrel decided to introduce its non-cheese products into grocery stores (starting with packaged spiral ham) under a logo with "Cracker Barrel" appearing more prominently than "Old Country Store," Kraft sued for trademark infringement and sought a preliminary injunction.
IP News
Federal Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Customer's Third-Party-Beneficiary Claim under First-to-File<br>Supreme Court Applies Atlantic Marine Standard to Forum Dispute in Patent Case<br>Claimed Inventions Falling within Prior Art Ranges Require Secondary Considerations to Show Nonobviousness
Establishing Copyright Damages When Party Moves for Summary Judgment
Section 504(b) of the Copyright Act allows a copyright owner to obtain both the owner's actual damages as well as an infringer's profits attributable to the infringed work that weren't included in the actual damages award. What are the burdens of proof when a copyright infringement plaintiff seeks this recovery after a pre-trial summary judgment motion has been filed? How does an expert's report work into this?
IP News
New Patent Litigation Reform Bills Introduced <br>U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument on Burden Of Proof for Licensee-DJ Plaintiff<br>A Split Federal Circuit Denies En Banc Rehearing In Case Involving Finality Of a Judicial Decision<br>Federal Circuit Explains Exhaustion of Method Patents
Expanding Defenses To Inducing Infringement
On Oct. 25, 2013, the Federal Circuit, by a vote of six-to-five, denied rehearing <i>en banc</i> in <i>Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Sys., Inc.,</i> (<i>Commil II</i>). That decision left intact the panel's holding, in a case of first impression, that an alleged indirect infringer's "good-faith belief of invalidity may negate the requisite intent for induced infringement."
