SoCal IP Institute :: March 20, 2017 :: Recent patent cases

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, March 20, 2017, we will discuss the following:
Nidec Motor Corporation v. Zhongshan Broad Ocean Motor Co. Ltd., et. al (Fed. Cir. Mar. 14, 2017) (available here).  Nidec appealed the PTAB’s decision finding one of its claims anticipated in an IPR proceeding. The Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s ruling finding […]

By |March 19th, 2017|Acquired Distintiveness, Patent, Trademark|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: March 13, 2017 :: A “Non-Commercial” Creative Commons License; Coney Island Specimen Refused in Citeable TTAB Decision

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, March 13, 2017, we will discuss the following:
Great Minds v. FedEx (E.D.N.Y Feb. 24, 2017) (available here).  This case discusses a”Non-Commercial” Creative Commons License.  In sum, FedEx was copying materials made by Plaintiff Great Minds, a math curriculum called “Eureka Math.”  The court granted FedEx’s motion to dismiss […]

By |March 8th, 2017|Acquired Distintiveness, Patent, Trademark|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: March 6, 2017 :: Preliminary Injunction for Riding Lawnmower Patent Affirmed and No Trademark Registration for DEEP! DEEP! DISH PIZZA

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, March 6, 2017, we will discuss the following:
Metalcraft of Mayville, Inc. v. The Toro Company (Fed. Cir. February 16, 2016) (available here).  A manufacturer of commercial riding lawnmowers brought a suit for infringement of a patent disclosing a suspended operator platform for a ride-on lawnmower.  The district court granted […]

By |March 4th, 2017|Acquired Distintiveness, Patent, Trademark|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: February 27, 2017 :: Patent infringement under 271(f) and Copyright infringement

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, February 27, 2017, we will discuss the following:
Life Technologies Corp et. al. v. Promega Corp., No. 14-1538 (S.Ct. February 22, 2017) (available here).  Life Technologies sublicensed Promega’s patent that related to a toolkit for genetic testing. Life Technologies then shipped one of the five components of the […]

By |February 23rd, 2017|Copyright, Infringement, Patent|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: January 16, 2017 :: An Alice About-Face in S.D.N.Y.

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, January 16, 2017, we will discuss the following:
TNS Media Research, LLC v. TIVO Research and Analytics, Inc., Case No. 11 Civ. 4039 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 29, 2016) (available here). But, before you read that decision, read this one. The November 29, 2016 decision is a vacatur of the earlier, February […]

By |January 12th, 2017|Patent, Statutory Subject Matter|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: January 9, 2017 :: Patent Claim Interpretation and Trademark for Service Performed by Software

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, January 9, 2017, we will discuss the following:
D’Agostino v. Mastercard Int’l Inc., Case Nos. 2016-1592 and 2016-1593 (Fed Cir. December 22, 2016) (available here).  Method claims of Plaintiff’s patents disclose processes for generating limited-use transaction codes to be given to a merchant by a customer for […]

By |January 3rd, 2017|Anticipation, Inter Partes Review, Obviousness, Patent, Trademark|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: December 19, 2016 :: Recent Cases on Direct and Indirect Infringement

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, December 19, 2016, we will discuss the following:
Medgraph, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc., Case No. 2015-2019 (Fed Cir. December 13, 2016) (available here). Medgraph asserted two patents against Medtronic related to an improved method for diagnosis and treatment of patients that generally relates to symptoms or medical […]

SoCal IP Institute :: Dec. 12, 2016 :: APPLE, INC. v. AMERANTH, INC.,

At our next SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, December 12, 2016, we will discuss the following:
Apple Inc. v. Ameranth. (Fed. Cir. November 29, 2016) (available here). In this appeal, the Court reviewed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions in three Covered Business Method (“CBM”) reviews.  Ameranth argued for a substantial evidence standard of review, […]

By |December 8th, 2016|Claim Construction, Patent, Unenforceability|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: Nov. 28, 2016 :: Notification in Inter Partes Review and Use of Trademark in Sale of Two Hats

There will be no SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, November 21, 2016. At our next SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, Nov. 28, 2016, we will discuss the following:
In re Nuvasive, Inc. (Fed. Cir. November 9, 2016) (available here).  Medtronic filed petitions for inter partes review of Nuvasive’s patents related to spinal fusion implants […]

By |November 17th, 2016|Inter Partes Review, Patent, Trademark, TTAB, Use in Commerce|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: Nov. 14, 2016 :: CSA’s Applicability to Trademark Applications and IPR Partial Institution

For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, Nov. 14, 2016, we will discuss the following:
In re JJ206, LLC dab JuJu Joints (T.T.A.B. October 27, 2016) (available here).  JuJu sought to register the marks Powered by JuJu and JuJu Joints for goods in class 34 explicitly indicating that the mark would be used in connection with […]

By |November 11th, 2016|Inter Partes Review, Patent, Trademark, TTAB, Use in Commerce|0 Comments