Filewrapper-old

USPTO Patent Invalidation Precludes Judicial Equitable Remedies and Sanctions
July 31, 2014

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has issued a decision inePlus, Inc. v. Lawson. ePlus sued Lawson asserting infringement of two patents—U.S. Patent Nos. 6,023,683 ("the '683 patent") and 6,505,172 ("the '172 patent"). At trial, the district court held two of ePlus's asserted system claims and three of ePlus's asserted method claims not invalid, and the jury found those same claims infringed by Law....... Read More


    Competing Without Practicing?Preliminary Injunctions for Patent Infringement
    April 24, 2014

      InTrebo Manufacturing, Inc., v. Firefly Equipment, LLC, the Federal Circuit held that a plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction for patent infringement does not need to practice the patent at issue in order to receive an injunction, so long as it sells a competing product. Trebro brought suit alleging that FireFly's sod harvester product infringed its U.S. Patent No. 8,336,638, and seeking a preliminary i....... Read More


      Flawed Evidence Undercuts "Charbucks" Trademark Suit
      November 27, 2013

        In Starbucks Corp. v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision denying injunctive relief in Starbucks’ trademark case against Black Bear Micro Roastery over Black Bear’s use of “Charbucks” for coffee. Starbucks sued Black Bear in 2001, alleging, among other things, trademark dilution in violation of 1....... Read More


        Exhausting Patent Rights Without a "Sale"
        November 22, 2013

          InLifeScan Scotland, LTD v. Shasta Technologies, LLC, the Federal Circuit clarified the ability of a patnet holder to enforce patent rights in a product it has given away, but not "sold." Defendant Shasta Technologies appealed from a decision of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California granting LifeScan Scotland a preliminary injunction. The injunction prohibits Shasta f....... Read More


          New and Useful - February 21, 2013
          February 21, 2013

            Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE ....... Read More


            Another issue headed for en banc review by the Federal Circuit: How to assess redesigned products
            May 17, 2010

              In an order Friday, the Federal Circuit granted en banc review of its second case in the past three weeks and its third over the past three months. This time it's a case involving Tivo relating to the contempt proceedings against Echostar relating to Tivo's DVR patents. After Echostar was found to infringe Tivo's patent and was permanently enjoined from infringement, it redesigned its DVR software....... Read More


              Second Circuit: revisions to Federal Trademark Dilution Statute revive Starbucks claim
              February 16, 2007

                The Second Circuit recently ruled that coffee giant Starbucks could proceed with its trademark dilution case against a defendant using the mark "Mr. Charbucks." In 2005, the lower court found after a bench trial that Starbucks had not proven actual dilution of its trademark, the requirement under the earlier version of the statute. The statute was amended on October 6, 2006, while the case was on appeal, and now....... Read More


                Court Applied Four-Factor Test for Preliminary Injunction Relief
                December 13, 2006

                  In Sanofi v. Apotex (Sanofi-Synthelabo, Sanofi-Synthelabo,Inc., and Bristol-Myers Squibb Sanofi Pharmaceuticals Holding Partnership v. Apotex, Inc. and Apotex Corp.), the Court affirmed the decision granted by the US District Court for the Southern District of New York granting a preliminary injunction in favor of Sanofi. At issue was a patent ("the '265 patent") for an active ingredient "clopidogrel bisulfate,....... Read More


                  Analysis of overall appearance determines whether patented design is dictated by function
                  November 19, 2006

                    In PHG Technologies, LLC v. St. John Companies, Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated the preliminary injunction of the district court finding St. John raised a substantial questions of validity of the two patents-at-issue.At issue were two design patents owned by PHG: the '405 and '197 patents. The '405 and '197 patents depend from a utility patent for patient identification labels. The '405 patent claims an orname....... Read More


                      Newer Posts Older Posts  

                    Purpose

                    The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.

                    Disclaimer

                    McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole

                    Connect with MVS

                    Enter your name and email address to recieve the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

                    Subscribe to: MVS Newsletter

                    Subscribe to: Filewrapper® Blog Updates

                      I have read and agree to the terms and conditions of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.