Section 505 of the Copyright Act provides for recovery of attorneys’ fees by prevailing litigants. It states that a court, “in its discretion may allow the recovery of full costs.” However, no guidance has been provided on this language in … Continue reading

Posted in Copyright & Idea Theft, Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on High Court Clarifies: Objective Unreasonableness Factor Favored in Attorneys’ Fees Analysis Under the Copyright Act

On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee.  One of the questions presented to the Court was the appropriate claim construction standard for inter partes review (IPR).  The fundamental dispute, as … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, PTAB | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Cuozzo Conundrum: Prosecution History Estoppel Remains An Open Issue

Through its recent decision in Halo Elecs., Inc. v. Pulse Elecs., Inc.[1], the Supreme Court discarded the mechanical two-part test governing enhanced damages fashioned by the Federal Circuit in Seagate, and gave district courts broad discretion to decide when to … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, PTAB | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Supreme Court Relaxes The Standard For Increased Patent Damages

The Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (“DTSA”) was signed into law by President Obama on Wednesday, May 11, 2016.[1]  This new act is the final piece of the federal law puzzle regarding intellectual property protections.  Until now, IP owners … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Trade Secret & Unfair Competition | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Connecting the Dots with DTSA

TVEyes is a media monitoring service, claiming, “to organize the world’s TV and radio broadcasts and make them universally searchable by the spoken word.”[1] Founded in 1999, the service uses innovative “audio mining” speech analytics technology to record and transcribe … Continue reading

Posted in Copyright & Idea Theft, Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on TVEyes on the Prize: Clarifying the Law of Copyright Fair Use

Glaser Weil is pleased to announce that Partner and Head of the Trademark, Copyright and Media Practice Erica Van Loon has been named to Law360’s “Rising Stars” list, which recognizes top legal talent under the age of 40 with outstanding … Continue reading

Posted in Copyright & Idea Theft, Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, Trade Secret & Unfair Competition, Trademark & Trade Dress | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Glaser Weil Partner and Head of the Trademark, Copyright and Media Practice Erica Van Loon Named to Law360’s “Rising Stars” List

As most practitioners know, even a duly issued patent can be invalidated under 35 U.S.C. § 101 if the patent’s claims are directed to a “patent-ineligible concept,” such as an abstract idea.  Yet, trying to anticipate whether a patent claim … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, PTAB | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 35 U.S.C. § 101 – If At First You Don’t Succeed, Try, Try Again

On March 23, 2016, Glaser Weil Partner, Mieke Malmberg, along with co-presenter, Jason Angell of Freitas Angell & Weinberg, LLP, presented a one hour talk on changes in patent litigation to participants in a one day conference sponsored by the … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Glaser Weil Partner Mieke Malmberg Speaking at “Patent Disputes for Our Time: New Realities, New Approaches”, Presented by the State Bar of California

In a recent landmark ruling, the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, held that Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act’s ban on “disparaging” marks violates the First Amendment.[1]  Section 2(a) provides that no trademark shall be refused registration “unless it consists … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Trademark & Trade Dress | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Freedom of Speech Protects “Disparaging” Marks, Federal Circuit Holds

Summary In its February 12, 2016 decision in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Impression Products, Inc., the Federal Circuit addressed two issues: (1) whether patent exhaustion applies when a patented item is sold subject to an express single-use/no-resale restriction, and then … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, PTAB | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Lexmark International, Inc. v. Impression Products, Inc. – The Latest on Patent Exhaustion