In Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies, LP, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, holding that 35 U.S.C. §314(d) precludes judicial review of Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) application of the one-year time bar in a decision to institute an inter partes review (IPR).
Read more »Tag: supreme court
-
Supreme Court Holds PTAB Decisions Concerning One-Year Time Bar to File IPR Are Not Judicially Reviewable Posted on: May 11, 2020 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
-
Smooth Sailing for States to Infringe Copyrights Posted on: April 02, 2020 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled 9-0 that a 1990 law intended to provide a means of redress against States that commit copyright infringement is unconstitutional as written, and that sovereign immunity shields States from being held liable for copyright infringement. Though most copyright owners do not have to worry about States infringing their works, the facts of the case offer an important insight that all owners of any IP should note.
Read more »
-
Supreme Court Agrees to Review Appealability of PTAB Time-Bar Rulings Posted on: June 28, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
On June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court agreed to review the question of whether 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) permits appeal of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) decision to institute an inter partes review (IPR) upon finding that 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)’s 1-year time bar to file an IPR does not apply.
Read more »
-
Supreme Court Declines to Hear ReDigi First Sale Doctrine Case Posted on: June 28, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
Despite the potentially important impact of the Second Circuit’s decision in Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc. on the digital music industry, the United States Supreme Court has denied ReDigi’s petition to review the Second Circuit’s refusal to apply the First Sale Doctrine to the transfer of digital music files.
Read more »
-
SCOTUS: Free Speech Permits Registration of ‘Immoral or Scandalous’ Trademarks Posted on: June 25, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
On June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) had violated applicant Erick Brunetti’s First Amendment right to free speech by denying him federal registration of the mark “FUCT” for use in his clothing line. In Iancu v. Brunetti, the Court held the Lanham Act’s prohibition on the registration of trademarks that “consist of or comprise immoral or scandalous matter” as unconstitutional.
Read more »
-
Privilege Review Presents Unique Challenges In Intellectual Property Cases Posted on: June 03, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
Intellectual property (IP) litigation typically requires review and production of large volumes of documents and electronically stored information (ESI). The evolution of ESI has greatly multiplied the number of documents and the coincident broadening of the attorney-client, work product, joint defense, and other privileges has made it much more difficult to identify and remove all privileged documents from production, even after the introduction of rules designed to lessen the burden presented by large ESI
Read more »
-
Supreme Court Issues Major Ruling on the Ongoing Viability of Trademark Licenses by Bankrupt Entities Posted on: May 20, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
At issue in Mission Product Holding v. Tempnology, LLC, was whether a licensee whose license agreement was "rejected" by the bankrupt debtor licensor was permitted to continue using the trademark that was the subject of the license. The debtor/licensor wanted the licensee to cease ongoing usage of the mark and cited to the bankruptcy law's tool of rejection as the basis for doing so. However, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the proposition that the licensee had to cease usage.
Read more »
-
Patent Litigation Trends in the Wake of TC Heartland Posted on: April 25, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
In May 2017, the Supreme Court issued TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, a decision that many expected would significantly limit forum shopping in patent cases. Prior to that case, patentees could file infringement lawsuits in any court with personal jurisdiction over the accused infringer, so most corporations were subject to suit in every district court.
Read more »
-
The Ongoing Evolution Of Patent Venue Posted on: March 21, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
A refresher and update on the ongoing evolution of what constitutes proper venue in a patent case. For over 20 years, venue in a patent case was proper in essentially any court in the United States. That all changed in May 2017 when the Supreme Court held in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Food Grp. Brands, LLC that 28 U.S.C. §1400(b) is the sole and exclusive venue provision for patent infringement actions, and cannot be supplemented by the general venue statute at 28 U.S.C. §1391.
Read more »
-
‘Full Moon’ Costs Denied by Supreme Court in Oracle Copyright Case Posted on: March 14, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
On March 4, 2019, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision overturning the Ninth Circuit Court's award of $12.8 million in costs in the copyright infringement matter Rimini Street, Inc. et al v. Oracle USA, Inc. et al. Newly confirmed Justice Kavanaugh penned the opinion for the Court, holding that the Ninth Circuit's expanded view of "full costs" set forth in 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920 and 1821 was improper, going beyond the "costs" typically available to copyright litigants
Read more »
-
Supreme Court Concludes That Copyright Registration Is A Prerequisite To Filing Copyright Lawsuit Posted on: March 04, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
In a decision that did not surprise many, the United State Supreme Court held unanimously that indeed, the Copyright Act means what is says, namely, “no civil action for infringement of the copyright in any United State work shall be instituted until… registration of the copyright claim has been made in accordance with this title.”
Read more »
-
Supreme Court Rules that AIA Did Not Alter the On-Sale Doctrine Posted on: January 24, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that the phrase “or otherwise available to the public” added to 35 U.S.C. § 102 in the America Invents Act in 2011 did not change the “on-sale” doctrine, which provides that patent protection cannot be granted for an invention that was on-sale more than one year before the effective filing date of the patent.
Read more »