Exceptional Case – SoCal IP Law Institute

SoCal IP Institute :: July 13, 2015 :: Standard for exceptional case and ownership of a registered trademark as between a foreign manufacturer and a U.S. seller

Our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, July 13, 2015 will be a discussion of the following cases: UVeritech, Inc. v. Amax Lighting, Inc., TTAB Cancellation No. 92057088, June 29, 2015 (available here). In this TTAB cancellation proceeding, the U.S. seller petitioned to cancel the foreign manufacturer's trademark. The TTAB ruled in favor of the U.S. seller and [...]

By SoCal IP|2015-07-12T13:26:14-07:00July 12th, 2015|Trademark, TTAB, Attorney's Fees, Exceptional Case, Likelihood of Confusion, Patent|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: April 20, 2015 :: District Courts Must Articulate Basis for not Awarding Attorneys’ Fees in an Exceptional Case & The Scope of Res Judicata

Our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, April 20, 2015 will be a discussion of the following cases: Oplus Tech, Ltd. v. Vizio, Inc. et al. (Fed. Cir. April 10, 2015) (available here, district court opinion available here). This is an appeal to the Federal Circuit from the Central District of California in which the [...]

By SoCal IP|2015-04-17T16:16:43-07:00April 17th, 2015|Litigation, Patent, Trademark, Attorney's Fees, Exceptional Case|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: April 13, 2015 :: A Citeable TTAB Decision (ProMark v. GFA) and Timely Atty Fees Motion in Slep-Tone

Our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, April 13, 2015 will be a discussion of the following cases: ProMark Brands Inc. v. GFA Brands Inc. (TTAB March 27, 2015) (available here). Here, ProMark (later assigned to H.J. Heinz Company) opposed GFA's trademark application for the plain word mark SMART BALANCE for: frozen appetizers containing poultry, meat, seafood or [...]

By SoCal IP|2015-04-10T15:26:53-07:00April 10th, 2015|Descriptiveness, Exceptional Case, Likelihood of Confusion, Opposition, Litigation, Patent, Trademark, TTAB, Use in Commerce, Attorney's Fees, Attorneys' Fees|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: April 6, 2015 :: Attorney Fees and Motions to Stay based on CBM Petitions

Our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, April 6, 2015 will be a discussion of two patent cases. Intellectual Ventures II v. JP Morgan, et. al., No. 2014-1724 (Fed. Cir. April 1, 2015) (available here). Intellectual Ventures sued JP Morgan on five patents alleging patent infringement. JP Morgan moved to stay the lawsuit on the grounds [...]

By SoCal IP|2015-04-02T12:05:55-07:00April 2nd, 2015|Patent, Attorney's Fees, Exceptional Case|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: March 30, 2015 :: False Endorsement by Bob Marley and Issue Preclusion Based Upon TTAB Decisions

Our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, March 30, 2015 will be a discussion of two cases. The first is a 9th Circuit trademark case involving the exploitation of Bob Marley's likeness. For this case, we will be joined by Paul Bost, an associate in the Los Angeles office of Sheppard Mullin. He is [...]

By SoCal IP|2015-03-27T17:15:25-07:00March 27th, 2015|Likelihood of Confusion, Issue Preclusion, Issue Preclusion, Trademark, Exceptional Case|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: August 8, 2011 :: Exceptional Cases

We will be discussing two recent Federal Circuit cases regarding exceptional cases in the patent context. We will discuss these cases in our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, August 8, 2011. Brief synopses of the cases are presented below. Old Reliable Wholesale, Inc. v. Cornell Corporation, Case. No. 2010-1247 (Fed. Cir. March 16, 2011) [...]

By SoCal IP|2011-08-05T22:15:11-07:00August 5th, 2011|Patent, Exceptional Case|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: August 1, 2011

We will be discussing the following two cases in our weekly meeting on Monday, August 1, 2011. Brief synopses of the two cases are presented below. TrafficSchool.com, Inc. v. EDriver Inc. (9th Cir. 7/28/2011) (attached) In an action arising from a very close imitation of the state DMV's website by a private, commercial website and [...]

By SoCal IP|2011-07-29T19:05:54-07:00July 29th, 2011|Patent, Sanctions, Exceptional Case, Inequitable Conduct|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: July 25, 2011 :: Exceptional Cases Under 35 U.S.C. 285 and The USPTO’s Proposed Changes to 37 C.F.R. 1.56(b)

We will be discussing one district court case awarding attorney's fees under 35 U.S.C. 285 in a patent suit and the USPTO's proposed new rule 1.56(b) after Therasense. We will discuss the case and proposed rule in our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, July 25, 2011. Brief synopses are presented below. Precision Links, [...]

By SoCal IP|2011-07-22T18:10:41-07:00July 22nd, 2011|Inequitable Conduct, Patent, Sanctions, Exceptional Case|0 Comments

SoCal IP Institute :: January 17, 2011

Please join us for the SoCal IP Institute meeting, Monday, January 17 at Noon. This activity is approved for 1 hour of MCLE credit. If you will be joining us, please RSVP to Amanda Jones by 9 am Monday. We will be discussing the following: iLOR, LLC v. Google, Inc., No. 10-1117, 1172 (Fed. Cir. [...]

By SoCal IP|2011-01-14T03:57:57-08:00January 14th, 2011|Patent, Damages, Exceptional Case, Malpractice|0 Comments