Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Obama Administration Vetoes ITC Ban
On Aug. 3, 2013, the Executive Office of the President disapproved of the U.S. International Trade Commission's Determination in In the Matter of Certain Electronic Devices, Including Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices, and Tablet Computers, Investigation No. 337-TA-794. On June 4, the ITC determined that Apple had violated Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 by importing smartphones and tablet computers that infringe a U.S. Patent owned by Samsung. During the 60-day period for Presidential review, the Administration stated that, because Samsung had committed to license the patent under FRAND terms to a standard setting organization, the exclusion order and cease and desist order would not be approved.
On Aug. 7, 2013, a Michigan Federal Judge awarded Stryker Corp. $210 million in treble damages, holding that defendant Zimmer Inc. willfully infringed Stryker's patents for surgical irrigation. Judge Robert J. Jonker held in Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer Inc., No. 10-cv-1223 (W.D. Mich.) that Stryker was entitled to treble damages because “Zimmer lost every argument it advanced at claim construction, then lost most of the disputed claims on summary judgment. It lost all of its remaining claims at trial.” Slip Op. at 3. Particularly, he noted that “trial proofs demonstrated that this was not a close case.” Id. Judge Jonker granted each of Stryker's five post-verdict motions, holding that Stryker is entitled to a permanent injunction, supplemental damages that have been accruing since the jury verdict, attorneys' fees because the case is “exceptional” under '285, prejudgment interest, and enhanced damages for willful infringement.
Obama Administration Vetoes ITC Ban
On Aug. 3, 2013, the Executive Office of the President disapproved of the U.S. International Trade Commission's Determination in In the Matter of Certain Electronic Devices, Including Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices, and Tablet Computers, Investigation No. 337-TA-794. On June 4, the ITC determined that
On Aug. 7, 2013, a Michigan Federal Judge awarded
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.