Features
Jess M. Collen, Matthew C. Wagner
&
Oren Gelber
Given the rising popularity of virtual worlds and the ability to generate real-world income from activities within the virtual realm, it is not surprising that the virtual marketplace is thriving and that trademark and copyright infringements occur on a regular basis.
Timothy C. Bickham
&
Houda Morad
Is a "product by process" claim infringed by products that are made by other processes? After 17 years of waiting, the Federal Circuit emphatically answered the question: No; product-by-process claims are only infringed by products made using the claimed process. Although the law now appears to be clear, the strongly worded dissent questions the soundness of the ruling and warns of potentially far-reaching implications for the pharmaceutical and biotech industries.
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
&
…
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
&
Who's doing what; who's going where.
Jeffrey S. Ginsberg, Matthew Berkowitz
&
Liberty McAteer
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
Richard Raysman
&
Jonathan P. Mollod
Federal courts are increasingly allowing litigants to serve foreign defendants via e-mail under certain circumstances.
Features
Gregory M. York
In <i>Takeda v. Mylan</i>, the Federal Circuit revisited attorney fees in the context of an ANDA application. In doing so, the court provided additional guidance regarding factual circumstances that may support such awards and addressed several of the unanswered questions from the <i>Yamanouchi v. Danbury</i> opinion.
Christopher P. Demas
Urged by the Supreme Court's opinion in <i>KSR</i>, the Federal Circuit has addressed its precedent regarding the obvious-to-try standard, positively stating a standard implied in its previous holdings.
Features
Vito J. DeBari
&
and Henry J. Cittone
While the Eastern District of Texas remains today one of the busiest patent litigation venues in the country, it is clear that <i>TS Tech</i> has led to an increase in the percentage of cases being transferred out of the EDTX and a significant decrease in the number of new patent cases being filed there.
Features
Jonathan Moskin
Despite the surface simplicity of keyword advertising disputes (typically entailing unwanted use of the exact trademark of a direct competitor promoting competing goods or services) the web the courts have spun addressing such Web-based advertising has been anything but. Fortunately, the Second Circuit's April 3 decision in <i>Rescuecom Corp. v. Google, Inc.</i>(on the one-year anniversary of oral argument), straightens at least some of the tangled seams by recognizing that keyword ads tied to a trademark do constitute a use in commerce of the subject mark.
