Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Federal Circuit recently addressed motions to transfer and drew a distinction between motions based upon the convenience of parties and witnesses and those for improper venue. It also clarified that the Supreme Court’s recent decision in TC Heartland did not supplant the long-standing rule that venue laws do not protect foreign defendants.
The Federal Circuit recently addressed motions to transfer and drew a distinction between motions filed under 28 U.S.C. §1404(a) based upon the convenience of parties and witnesses and those filed under 28 U.S.C. §1406(a) for improper venue. In re: HTC Corp., 889 F.3d 1349, 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2018). The Federal Circuit further closed a potential venue loophole created by TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, 137 S.Ct. 1514, and clarified that the Supreme Court’s recent decision did not supplant the long-standing rule that venue laws do not protect foreign defendants. In re: HTC, at 1357.
*May exclude premium content
By Chris Bussert
As brands mature over time, their owners often seek to update marks that are subject to a federal registration or registration application. In some cases, the impetus for the amendment may be deliberately to freshen, tweak, or otherwise modernize the subject mark. In other cases, brand owners may recognize after the fact that their current usage of a mark does not match the mark as originally registered or applied for.
By Alex Simonson
In the recent U.S. Supreme Court case of USPTO v. Booking.com, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the term Booking.com is not necessarily generic merely because it is composed of two components, each itself generic. In so deciding, Justice Ginsburg averred that there is an appropriate metric to determine if such a term is indeed generic, that of consumer perception.
By James W. Soong
This article discusses the significant contrast between consideration of issues related to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Int’l in prosecution and their resolution by the PTAB.
By Howard Shire and Shaleen Patel
Federal Circuit Modifies Facebook IPR Joinder Ruling
District Court: Stipulation of Noninfringement Does Not Preclude Post-Remand Finding of Infringement