Sergey Kolmykov
&
Zachary Silbersher
The Federal Circuit recently addressed whether it is proper to join multiple defendants within a single action for no other reason than each defendant is accused of infringing the same patent.
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
&
…
Howard J. Shire
&
Joseph Mercadante
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Features
Vincent J. Poppiti
&
Mian R. Wang
The naughty five-year-old Japanese comic-book character Crayon Shinchan would tell foreign trademark owners that although foreign trademarks ultimately receive legal protection in China, pragmatic owners must be mindful of the time and costs involved.
Features
John M. Cone
&
Megan M. O'Laughlin
Although the Supreme Court's decision in <i>Kappos v. Hyatt</i> addressed the Patent Act specifically, the decision may have implications for cases brought in district courts to challenge decisions of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. The <i>Kappos</i> decision may also encourage defendants to continue pushing against the "clear and convincing evidence" standard for obviousness challenges based on prior art not considered by the PTO during examination.
Timothy Denny Greene
Although neither service providers nor content providers can claim a complete victory, the Second Circuit's <i>Viacom</i> opinion represents a pragmatic, middle-of-the-road solution to several issues at the heart of the new user-centered Internet experience.
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
&
…
Jeffrey S. Ginsberg
&
Joseph Mercadante
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Angie M. Hankins
In <i>Marine Polymer Tech., Inc. v. HemCon, Inc.</i>, No. 2010-1549, 2012 WL 858700 (Fed. Cir. March 15, 2012), a majority found that intervening rights only arise as a result of re-examination when a claim has been amended or added during the re-examination, even though the issue was not considered below.
Kyle-Beth Hilfer
In March 2012, the Ninth Circuit in <i>Skydive Arizona, Inc. v. Quattrocchi, et al.</i> upheld a $6.6 million judgment for trademark infringement, false advertising, and cybersquatting, while overturning the district court's doubling of actual damages. The opinion succinctly outlines appellate review standards while offering insights into how to prove a Lanham Act and cybersquatting case.
