The Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether a trademark’s inherent or conceptual strength is a question of fact for juries or law for judges — a ruling that could reshape summary judgment practice in trademark infringement cases.
The Supreme Court declined to review a $168 million trade secret award against Tata Consultancy Services, leaving intact the Fifth Circuit’s judgment upholding $56 million in compensatory damages and $112 million in punitive damages for TCS’s theft of life-insurance software trade secret
A unanimous Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit and ended Amarin’s induced infringement suit against Hikma’s skinny-label generic of Vascepa, holding that anodyne marketing references to the branded drug do not plausibly allege that a generic maker actively encouraged infringing u
A unanimous Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit and ended Amarin’s induced infringement suit against Hikma’s skinny-label generic of Vascepa, holding that anodyne marketing references to the branded drug do not plausibly allege that a generic maker actively encouraged infringing u
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in CareDx v. Natera, leaving intact the Third Circuit’s ruling that proof of actual consumer deception is required to support Lanham Act damages even when advertising is deliberately and literally false.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in CareDx v. Natera, leaving intact the Third Circuit’s ruling that proof of actual consumer deception is required to support Lanham Act damages even when advertising is deliberately and literally false.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in Rideshare Displays’ challenge to the Federal Circuit’s invalidation of vehicle identification system patents under Section 101, where the court also declined to follow the USPTO’s own eligibility guidelines.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in Rideshare Displays’ challenge to the Federal Circuit’s invalidation of vehicle identification system patents under Section 101, where the court also declined to follow the USPTO’s own eligibility guidelines.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in CAO Lighting’s challenge arguing that the Federal Circuit’s one-line Rule 36 affirmances of PTAB decisions violate the statutory mandate for judicial ‘opinions’ under Loper Bright principles.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in CAO Lighting’s challenge arguing that the Federal Circuit’s one-line Rule 36 affirmances of PTAB decisions violate the statutory mandate for judicial ‘opinions’ under Loper Bright principles.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in USAA’s challenge to the Federal Circuit’s invalidation of mobile check deposit patents under Alice, leaving the abstract-idea framework unchanged despite broad industry support for review.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in USAA’s challenge to the Federal Circuit’s invalidation of mobile check deposit patents under Alice, leaving the abstract-idea framework unchanged despite broad industry support for review.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in EscapeX IP v. Google, leaving in place a Federal Circuit decision affirming over $250,000 in attorney-fee sanctions against a patent plaintiff that pursued a ‘frivolous’ infringement suit against YouTube Music.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in EscapeX IP v. Google, leaving in place a Federal Circuit decision affirming over $250,000 in attorney-fee sanctions against a patent plaintiff that pursued a ‘frivolous’ infringement suit against YouTube Music.
The Supreme Court left standing a Ninth Circuit ruling that Walmart was not directly liable for copyright infringement in product photographs uploaded by a third-party drop-ship vendor, declining to resolve a circuit split over the volitional conduct test for online platform copyright liability.
The Supreme Court left standing a Ninth Circuit ruling that Walmart was not directly liable for copyright infringement in product photographs uploaded by a third-party drop-ship vendor, declining to resolve a circuit split over the volitional conduct test for online platform copyright liability.
The Supreme Court declined to review a Federal Circuit decision holding that a consumer and law professor lacked statutory standing to challenge the registration of RAPUNZEL as a trademark for dolls, leaving in place a strict rule requiring trademark challengers to show a direct commercial injury.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in CPC Patent Technologies’s challenge to the Federal Circuit’s use of Rule 36 summary affirmances without written opinions in patent appeals, leaving the controversial practice intact.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in a DNA-sequencing patent malpractice case that highlights a structural problem in patent law: inventors can be bound by litigation outcomes through claim preclusion while courts simultaneously hold that no attorney-client duty was owed to them.
The Supreme Court declined to review a Federal Circuit decision holding that a consumer and law professor lacked statutory standing to challenge the registration of RAPUNZEL as a trademark for dolls, leaving in place a strict rule requiring trademark challengers to show a direct commercial injury.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in CPC Patent Technologies’s challenge to the Federal Circuit’s use of Rule 36 summary affirmances without written opinions in patent appeals, leaving the controversial practice intact.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari in a DNA-sequencing patent malpractice case that highlights a structural problem in patent law: inventors can be bound by litigation outcomes through claim preclusion while courts simultaneously hold that no attorney-client duty was owed to them.
The Supreme Court unanimously reversed a billion-dollar verdict against Cox Communications and held that an internet service provider is contributorily liable for user copyright infringement only when it induces the infringement or sells a service tailored to infringement. Mere knowledge that subscr
The Supreme Court unanimously reversed a billion-dollar verdict against Cox Communications and held that an internet service provider is contributorily liable for user copyright infringement only when it induces the infringement or sells a service tailored to infringement. Mere knowledge that subscr