More info…
(U.S. Fed. Cir., Intellectual Property, Patent) In a patent infringement action, summary judgment for defendant on the ground that plaintiff’s patent was invalid for obviousness is vacated and remanded where the evidence before the district court did not support the court’s conclusion that a prior art patent disclosed the use of compatible polymeric materials described in plaintiff’s patent for desiccant containers.
Ball Aerosol
&
Specialty Container, Inc. v. Ltd. Brands, Inc.
(U.S. Fed. Cir., Consumer Products, Intellectual Property, Patent, Retail) In a patent case brought against defendants including Bath & Body Works involving a candle tin with a removable cover that also acts as a base for the candle holder, summary judgment of validity and infringement, an award of damages, and a denial of a motion for reconsideration is reversed where the district court erred as a matter of law in failing to find two claims of the patent at issue to have been obvious, and in finding infringement of those claims.
La Resolana Architects PA v. Reno, Inc.
(U.S. 10th Cir., Construction, Copyright, Intellectual Property, Property Law & Real Estate) In a copyright infringement action related to designs for modular homes, judgment for Defendants is affirmed where the District Court did not clearly err in finding that Defendants, as a factual matter, did not copy Plaintiffs’ work.
Taco Bell Corp. v. TBWA Chiat/Day Inc.
(U.S. 9th Cir., Contracts, Entertainment Law, Food & Beverages, Intellectual Property, Media Law, Remedies) In a suit against an advertising agency seeking indemnification for damages entered against plaintiff in a suit based on plaintiff’s breach of an implied contract for using a third party’s Chihuahua character in advertising developed by defendant, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where the evidence only showed fault for the previous liability on the part of plaintiff, thus defendant owed no duty to indemnify.
Florida Attorney
More info…
(U.S. 11th Cir., Civil Procedure, Copyright, Entertainment Law, Intellectual Property) In a copyright infringement case involving the rap song “The Weedman” which appears on a Lil John album “Kings of Crunk”, dismissal of plaintiff-musician’s claim for breach of fiduciary duty is affirmed where: 1) the amended complaint failed to allege a fiduciary relationship and thus failed to state a claim for relief; and 2) plaintiff could not the grant of summary judgment based on arguments raised for the first time in his motion for reconsideration.
tampa divorce attorney
More info…
(U.S. 9th Cir., Contracts, Insurance Law, Intellectual Property, Media Law, Remedies, Trademark) In a suit by an insurance company for reimbursement of its settlement contribution in a trademark infringement action, summary judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) a “first publication” exclusion found in the excess insurance policy applied to infringement claims; 2) defendant was judicially estopped from claiming that it first published infringing material after it purchased the policy; and 3) the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding two defendants jointly and severally liable for repayment of plaintiff’s contribution.
Rein v. US Patent
&
Trademark Office
(U.S. 4th Cir., Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Patent, Trademark) In a civil action alleging defendant-agencies did not conduct an adequate search for documents requested by plaintiff-law firm under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and that defendant-agencies improperly withheld documents as exempt which were discovered during the search, award of summary judgment to defendant-agencies is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the district court erred in finding the Vaughn index contained adequate descriptive information to determine whether the challenged documents were properly withheld in whole or in part; 2) the district court did not err in holding the defendant-agencies properly withheld the challenged documents in whole or in part based on the deliberative process privilege; 3) the district court did it err in concluding the challenged redacted documents did not contain segregable material; and 4) the district court did not err in concluding the PTO properly withheld or redacted materials based on the attorney-client privilege, as protected by Exemption 5.
aviation lawyer
More info…
(U.S. 4th Cir., Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Patent, Trademark) In a civil action alleging defendant-agencies did not conduct an adequate search for documents requested by plaintiff-law firm under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and that defendant-agencies improperly withheld documents as exempt which were discovered during the search, award of summary judgment to defendant-agencies is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the district court erred in finding the Vaughn index contained adequate descriptive information to determine whether the challenged documents were properly withheld in whole or in part; 2) the district court did not err in holding the defendant-agencies properly withheld the challenged documents in whole or in part based on the deliberative process privilege; 3) the district court did it err in concluding the challenged redacted documents did not contain segregable material; and 4) the district court did not err in concluding the PTO properly withheld or redacted materials based on the attorney-client privilege, as protected by Exemption 5.
lawyer in tampa
External articles | SEO-FSER | 
February 28, 2009 3:05 am | 
Comments (0) 
Subscribe