Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Supreme Court began 2014 by reversing the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision in Medtronic, Inc. v. Mirowski Family Ventures, LLC, 134 S. Ct. 843 (Jan. 22, 2014). The Supreme Court held that the burden of proof on infringement remains with the patent owner even when a licensee files a declaratory judgment suit seeking a judgment of no infringement. Id. at 846. The Supreme Court reached this conclusion based on three legal propositions:
On the practical side, the Supreme Court found that:
Thus, the Supreme Court concluded that the burden of proof on infringement remains with the patent owner in a declaratory judgment proceeding for non-infringement.
The Underlying Facts
In 1991, Mirowski Family Ventures, LLC (MFV) entered into a patent license agreement with Eli Lilly & Co., which then sublicensed the subject patents to Medtronic, Inc. (Medtronic). Under the agreement, if MFV notified Medtronic that a new Medtronic product infringed, Medtronic could: 1) cure the non-payment of royalties; or 2) cure the non-payment of royalties and challenge the assertion of infringement by bringing a declaratory judgment action. Medtronic also could choose not to challenge the asserted infringement but, contrary to the terms of the agreement, not pay royalties. In that case, MFV could terminate the license and bring an infringement action.
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
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.
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.
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.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?