Author Caesar.law

Posted on Mar 23, 2016 in Articles

Any person associated with the filing and prosecution of a patent application has a “duty of candor and good faith” toward the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Failure to satisfy this duty can have dire consequences—a court may determine that “inequitable conduct” has occurred and a patent may therefore be found to be unenforceable. Proving that a party has engaged in inequitable conduct, however, has become very difficult over the past few years. So when recently, in Ohio Willow Wood v. Alps South LLC, 2015-1132 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 19, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reached an opinion that inequitable conduct had ­occurred, many IP attorneys took notice.

Posted on Mar 21, 2016 in Blog

On March 18, 2016, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled for the first time that an ANDA filer can basically be sued anywhere unless it is unfair, widening broadly jurisdiction in ANDA cases. Mylan Inc. was sued twice in Delaware based on two ANDA filings and argued the Delaware court did not have specific or general jurisdiction over it.

Posted on Mar 4, 2016 in News

In the case of Access Business Group LLC v. BattleChem Distribution, Inc. and Divi’s Laboratories, LTD., 1:13-cv-00828-RJJ (US DC Western District of Michigan), the Honorable Robert J. Jonker on March 3, 2016 granted defendants’ Motion to Transfer a breach of contract and breach of warranty action to the Central District of California.

Posted on Feb 24, 2016 in Articles

The U.S. Supreme Court is soon set to decide the standard that should be used when the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office reassesses the validity of an issued patent. The case, Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC v. Lee, No. 15-446, may play a significant role in determining whether an accused patent infringer can defend itself by arguing that the asserted patent should have never been granted in the first place.

Posted on Feb 15, 2016 in Blog

In Lexmark Int’l, Inc. v. Impression Prods., Inc., No. 14-1617 (Fed. Cir. 2016), the Federal Circuit issued an important opinion regarding patent exhaustion (the termination of a patent owner’s ability to claim infringement damages following the first authorized sale of a patented product).

Posted on Feb 1, 2016 in Articles

A U.S. patent application must be filed within one year of the underlying invention being on-sale or in public use, or all rights are lost. Experimental use, however, creates a grace period beyond the one year deadline. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will soon issue an important opinion clarifying when an experimental use has actually occurred.

Posted on Jan 27, 2016 in Blog

On January 26, 2016, a District of Delaware jury awarded Greatbatch Ltd. $37.5 Million in damages in the Greatbatch Ltd. v. AVX Corporation and AVX Filters Corporation (collectively “AVX”) patent litigation.

Posted on Jan 25, 2016 in Articles

The football team The Washington Redskins and the musical group The Slants have recently been tied together – both have argued that their First Amendment rights were violated when their federal trademark registrations were denied. In The Slants’ case, however, the battle over the registration of their trademark began with arguments that racism and the ethnicity of the trademark owner were the causes of the dispute.

Posted on Dec 23, 2015 in Articles

What new ideas and innovations will be seen in the near future? How will technology be affecting our lives in the months ahead? To answer these questions, technologists often study recently granted patents and published patent applications in order to predict how innovation will influence the future.

Posted on Dec 22, 2015 in Blog

In the case of In re Simon Shiao Tam (Case No. 14-1203), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the court that has jurisdiction over the United States Patent and Trademark Office, struck down the provision of Section 2A of the Lanham Act which prevents registering offensive trademarks. Yes, the same provision of the Lanham Act which was used to hold invalid the Washington Redskins mark has been held to be unconstitutional.