IP Now

Stereolithography (SL) Resin Maker Desotech Fails to Prove Antitrust Claims

3D Systems (DDD) won a second legal battle against DSM Desotech Inc. (Desotech) primarily regarding antitrust claims pertaining to resins used in additive manufacturing or 3D printing, specifically stereolithography (SL). Last month, the Appeals Court for the Northern District of Illinois affirmed the summary judgment granted by the District Court for defendant, 3D Systems. 3D …

Continue reading “Stereolithography (SL) Resin Maker Desotech Fails to Prove Antitrust Claims”

Amazon's Anticipatory Shipping Patent Explained

At the tail end of 2013, Amazon (AMZN) obtained issuance of an interesting patent, claiming a system and method of anticipatory shipping, i.e. shipping one or more items in your general direction before you even purchase said items. The patent, entitled “Method and system for anticipatory package shipping,” can be read here. Of my own …

Continue reading “Amazon's Anticipatory Shipping Patent Explained”

Coconuts Fish Cafe Maui, HI

View registrations here.

Coconuts Fish Cafe

View the registration here.

“Big Game” vs. Super Bowl: A Trademark Matter

As Super Bowl Sunday approaches, more and more commercials reference the “Big Game” in attempt to boost sales by indirect association with the hugely popular finale to the American football season. Watch enough television leading up to the Super Bowl and you might begin think that the only products sold in all of the United …

Continue reading ““Big Game” vs. Super Bowl: A Trademark Matter”

World Famous Hawleywoods Barber Shop

View registration here.

Trademarks: Sometimes Calling It Quits Is the Best Course of Action

Last year, the Supreme Court handed down a decision in a trademark case that in essence had nothing to do with trademarks. The original battle at the lower court was over a line of shoes and trademark owned by Nike called Air Force 1s, which another company, Already, claimed was an invalid trademark. Already designs …

Continue reading “Trademarks: Sometimes Calling It Quits Is the Best Course of Action”

Hookah Company Inhales Copyright Loss, Exhales Attorney Fees

Last week, the California Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (the Court) affirmed the District Court’s summary judgment for defendant Starbuzz Tobacco, Inc. (Starbuzz), stating that Starbuzz did not violate the copyright protection granted to Inhale, Inc (Inhale) in 2011 for their hookah water container. The case, Inhale, Inc. v. Starbuzz Tobacco, Inc., specifically …

Continue reading “Hookah Company Inhales Copyright Loss, Exhales Attorney Fees”

Naturaljourneys

View registration here.

Galderma Labs Patents Invalidated for Obviousness

Last week, on December 11, 2013, in Galderma Labs., L.P. v. Tolmar, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Newman, Bryson, Prost*) reversed the district court’s judgment that U.S. Patents No. 7,579,377, No. 7,737,181, No. 7,834,060, No. 7,838,558, and No. 7,868,044, (the Patents) were not invalid for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § …

Continue reading “Galderma Labs Patents Invalidated for Obviousness”

Hawleywoods

View registration here.

Proposed Legislation May Now Permit Fee Shifting in Patent Litigation

Currently in patent infringement cases (including declaratory judgment cases), 35 U.S.C. section 285 reads, “the court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party” (emphasis added).  As of December 5, 2013, House Representative Bob Goodlatte’s “Innovation Act,” among other changes, seeks to amend this fee shifting statute to have the non-prevailing …

Continue reading “Proposed Legislation May Now Permit Fee Shifting in Patent Litigation”