IP Pipeline Blog

The Supreme Court reversed Apple’s $399 million verdict against Samsung for infringing Apple’s design patents covering certain aspects of the iPhone. However, the Court’s decision arguably leaves critical questions unanswered.Read More

Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands, which turns on whether the stripes and chevrons found in Varsity Brands’ cheerleader uniforms are sufficiently “separable” from the overall uniform to be copyrightableRead More

The Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands on October 31 to determine whether the stripes and chevrons found in Varsity Brands’ cheerleader uniforms are sufficiently “separable” from the overall uniform to be copyrightable.Read More

Non-attorneys are allowed to practice before the Patent Office. However, because they are not attorneys, there is an open question of whether attorney-client privilege extends to their communications with clients. This question has previously been determined on a case-by-case basis. The USPTO has proposed a new rule that...Read More

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in the long-running patent dispute Samsung v. Apple. The dispute centers on a jury award of damages in favor of Apple for Samsung’s infringement of design patents covering elements of the iPhone. While the parties agreed that the appellate court had applied the wrong standard, Apple...Read More

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Samsung Electronics v. Apple, Incorporated today, the long-running patent dispute between the companies involving Samsung’s alleged infringement of Apple’s design patents covering certain aspects of the iPhone.Read More

Trade secrets are one of the four main types of intellectual property rights. When used properly, trade secrets can be the most valuable asset in your intellectual property portfolio. Let’s take a look at how Col. Harlan Sanders built an empire by using trade secrets as part of a comprehensive IP portfolio.Read More

The Federal Circuit recently reversed the Trademark Trial and Appeal’s Board determination that patent claims were invalid as obvious when the TTAB overused “common sense” to fill-in missing claim limitations and find a patent was invalid on obviousness grounds.Read More

AGIS v. Life360 upheld patent invalidity in a case where Eric Christu and Daniel Barsky were members of the trial team. Coined terms in patents may result in patent invalidity if the coined term is not adequately disclosed. Technology patents cannot used coined terms that are really nothing more than generic ‘general purpose...Read More

Two recent decisions by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit provide some helpful insights into the application of the two-step framework for assessing patent-eligible subject matter.Read More