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
- Romag Fasteners v. Fossil: Willful Infringement is Not Required to Recover an Award of Profits in Trademark Infringement
- Trademark Squatting or Lucrative Opportunity? Time Will Tell
- Patent and Trademark Deadlines Further Extended Due to the COVID-19 Crisis
- Does the COVID Crisis Warrant Ex Parte Relief to Address Price Gouging under Trademark Theories?
- Patent and Trademark Right Deadlines Further Extended (to June 1, 2020) Due to the COVID-19 Crisis
- Does COVID19 Warrant A 90-Day Extension Of a Case Pending More Than A Year?
- Does the COVID19 Crisis Warrant Relief from a Preliminary Injunction Related to Fire Engines?
- Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Deadlines Extended Due to the COVID19 Crisis
- Do You Need To Threaten Litigation To Trigger Declaratory Judgment Subject Matter Jurisdiction?
- Are the Pleading Standards for Method Claims More Rigorous in the Context of Rule 11?