IP Pipeline Blog

Yes. Thursday, LLC and Klhip, Inc. are both retailers that use Amazon to sell nail clippers online. Klhip filed a number of claims with Amazon about Thursday. In response, Amazon would take Thursday down and investigate. Each time, Klhip's allegations have been found baseless (and Thursday's Amazon presence has been...Read More

Taser International, Inc. sued Phazzer Electronics, Inc. for patent infringement. The discovery history appears tortured.Read More

The Supreme Court will consider the scope of the on-sale bar to obtaining a patent. This decision has the potential to remove a substantial barrier to business encountered by many new and small businesses that own intellectual property assets.Read More

Commodores Entertainment Corporation has sued Thomas McClary, a former Commodores band member, for various trademark claims. Read More

The Supreme Court recently decided the Disparagement Clause of the Lanham Act is unconstitutional, paving the way for parties to register trademarks that were previously prohibited as ‘disparaging.’ The ruling also ends the long-running battle over the Washington Redskins’ trademarks.Read More

On remand from the Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit has declined to craft a test for calculating design patent damages when the patent-in-suit covers only a component of a larger product. Instead, it has been left to the Northern District of California to sort out the issue and hold a new trial, if necessary.Read More

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