2015
Self-Incrimination, Patent Style
Stacy Stitham / 0 CommentsWith a tip of the hat to Docket Navigator, for pointing out this interesting slant on an otherwise uninteresting procedural motion. The issue arose in the context of negotiating a protective order governing the exchange of confidential information, a routine (if crucial) preliminary step in most pieces of complex litigation. In short, Defendant wanted assurances...
Read More2015
Patent Profiting
Stacy Stitham / 0 CommentsWith a tip of the hat to IP Watchdog for alerting us to a new, novel, and controversial way to make a quick buck on patents. As reported by the Wall Street Journal, hedge fund manager Kyle Bass — with the help of Erich Spangenberg, formerly known as the patent troll that everyone loved to...
Read More2015
Getting its Due
Stacy Stitham / 0 CommentsAs we’ve mentioned in the past, the U.S. Copyright Office is the redheaded stepchild of intellectual property protection. Unlike the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office – a federal agency in its own right, albeit one with somewhat strained resources – the U.S. Copyright Office operates under the aegis of the Library of Congress. Which is...
Read More2015
Likelihood of Confusion in a War on Two Fronts
Stacy Stitham / 0 CommentsThe Supreme Court issued an opinion in a trademark case the other day with interesting implications for those of you who defend – or defend against – trademark portfolios. The case, B&B Hardware v. Hargis Industries, involved a trademark opposition running tandem with a trademark infringement lawsuit over a square off between the marks SEALTITE and...
Read More2015
The Cares of In-House Counsel
Stacy Stitham / 0 CommentsThe latest annual survey of chief legal officers by the Association of Corporate Counsel, which came out last month, provides interesting insight into the topics that keep in-house counsel on their toes. Perhaps unsurprisingly, data breaches and protection of corporate data made the list – with more than a quarter of the respondents reporting that...
Read More2015
Nothing Special About A Specialty Court
Stacy Stitham / 0 CommentsThe Supreme Court reminded everyone, once again, that just because patent cases are heard by a special court of appeals, they are not governed by special rules that apply only to patent cases. In Teva Pharm. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Court ruled 7–2 that when there are subsidiary factual issues in claim construction,...
Read More2014
“Equity aids the vigilant, not the sleeping ones”
Stacy Stitham / 0 CommentsLatin Proverb Laches is one of those words that law students pay a great deal of money to learn the meaning of in law school. Essentially, the doctrine of laches permits a defendant to raise as a defense to a claim the argument that the plaintiff unjustifiably delayed in bringing the claim. In the patent...
Read More2014
Guidance through the Patent Eligibility Thicket
Stacy Stitham / 0 CommentsAs readers of our blog are well aware, the Supreme Court has certainly shaken matters up when it comes to patent eligibility, the “threshold” inquiry to test a patent’s mettle under Section 101 of the Patent Act. In particular, the Court’s recent opinion in Alice has proven to have implications as deep as the rabbit...
Read More2014
Good Enough For Patent Law, Good Enough For Copyright Law…
Stacy Stitham / 0 CommentsGoogle copies Java’s method headers in its API for Android. Java’s creator, Sun Microsystems, is purchased by Oracle. Oracle sues Google for copyright infringement. (Admit it. That last bit didn’t surprise you). The district court finds that the API method headers aren’t protectable under copyright. The Federal Circuit reverses—Java API taxonomy is copyrightable as a...
Read More