Monthly Archives: August 2015

Jack Wolfskin Ausrustung Fur Draussen GmbH & Company KGAA v. New Millenium Sports, S.L.U.

Posted on August 31, 2015 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2014-17890 LOURIE, BRYSON, CHEN August 19, 2015 Brief Summary: TTAB decision affirmed-in-part, reversed-in-part, and remanded because NMS did not abandon its mark, the TTAB did not consider JWA’s mark as a whole, and failed to recognize “the relatively … Continue reading →

Posted in Trademarks | Leave a comment

ABT Systems, LLC and Univ. Central Florida Board of Trustees v. Emerson Electric Co.

Posted on August 27, 2015 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2014-1618, 2014-1700 PROST, CLEVENGER, SCHALL August 19, 2015 Brief Summary: DC denial of JMOL was vacated and the obviousness judgment reversed because claimed invention “would have been naturally implemented by a person skilled in the art” and secondary … Continue reading →

Posted in Obviousness | Leave a comment

Personalized User Model, LLP and Yochai Konig v. Google Inc.

Posted on August 26, 2015 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2014-1841, -2015-1022 PROST, LOURIE, REYNA August 18, 2015   Brief Summary:  DC denial of Google’s breach of contract claim relating to assignment of an employee’s invention affirmed.  PUM’s appeal of claim construction decision denied for lack of case … Continue reading →

Posted in Appeal, Assignment / Ownership, Claim Construction | Leave a comment

JVC Kenwood Corporation v. Nero, Inc.

Posted on August 21, 2015 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2014-1011 NEWMAN, DYK, REYNA August 17, 2015 Brief Summary: The FC panel affirmed the DC decision because “direct infringement was not established and thus Nero was not shown to be potentially liable for indirect infringement.” It also found … Continue reading →

Posted in Inducement to Infringe, Infringement | Leave a comment

In re: Louisiana Fish Fry Products, Ltd.

Posted on August 19, 2015 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2013-1619 NEWMAN(C), REYNA, HUGHES August 14, 2015 Brief Summary: PTO refusal to register LOUISIANA FISH FRY PRODUCTS BRING THE TASTE OF LOUISIANA HOME! without disclaiming FISH FRY PRODUCTS affirmed, fiding no showing of acquired distinctiveness. Summary: LFF appealed … Continue reading →

Posted in Trademarks | Leave a comment

Akamai Technologies, Inc. et al. v. Limelight Networks, Inc.

Posted on August 15, 2015 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket Nos. 2009-1372, 2009-1380, 2009-1416, 2009-1417 Rehearing en banc August 13, 2015 Brief Summary: “Section 271(a) is not limited solely to principal-agent relationships, contractual arrangements, and joint enterprise, as the vacated panel decision held…Rather, to determine direct infringement, we consider … Continue reading →

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Suprema, Inc. et al. v. International Trade Commission et al.

Posted on August 12, 2015 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2012-1170 En banc opinion (REYNA), DYK(d), O’MALLEY/PROST/LOURIE/DYK (d) August 10, 2015 Revised Sept. 14, 2015: affirmed ITC findings of no infringement of US 7,277,562, infringement of US 5,900,993, and that Appellants failed to prove invalidity of the ‘993 … Continue reading →

Posted in Importation, International Trade Commission | Leave a comment

Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc. et al. v. Covidien, Inc. et al.

Posted on August 11, 2015 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2014-1370 LOURIE, BRYSON, CHEN August 7, 2015 Brief Summary: DC finding of invalidity of ‘501 patent for indefiniteness reversed; claim construction of ‘275 patent affirmed but grant of SJ vacated as evidence of genuine dispute considered in favor … Continue reading →

Posted in Claim Construction, Design Patents, Indefiniteness | Leave a comment

Monosol RX, LLC (Petitioner) v. Arius Two, Inc. (Patent Owner)

Posted on August 7, 2015 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Case IPR2014-00376 Patent No. 7,579,019B2 PTAB Final Written Decision (Aug. 5, 2015) Brief Summary: Monosol’s Petition based on anticipation and obviousness denied based on construction of Arius’ claims as being limited to single layer devices. Summary: Monosol filed a Petition … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Claim, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR, Obviousness | Leave a comment

Juice Generation, Inc. v. GS Enterprises LLC

Posted on August 7, 2015 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2014-1853 NEWMAN, REYNA, TARANTO July 20, 2015 Brief Summary: Board decision regarding a likelihood of confusion between PEACE LOVE AND JUICE and PEACE & LOVE remanded as third-party use and registrations were not properly considered and an analysis … Continue reading →

Posted in Trademarks | Leave a comment