Tag Archives: USPTO

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

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

On February 11, 2016, Glaser Weil Partner, Mieke Malmberg, presented a one hour webinar sponsored by the State Bar of California on the use of the Federal Circuit’s Model order on electronic discovery in patent cases. Many times parties stipulate … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Slaying the Dragon: Understanding and Effectively Managing the Use of the Model Order on E-Discovery in Patent Cases

Recently, the  Federal Circuit, for a second time this year, evaluated infringement of a method claim.[1]  The Court, vacating the recent panel decision in May, outlined the governing framework for direct infringement of a method claim.  It held that direct … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The En Banc Federal Circuit in Akamai v. Limelight Broadens the Scope of Direct Infringement under Section 271(a)

On March 24, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in the case of B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Indus., Inc. B&B Hardware owned the federally registered trademark SEALTIGHT for use in connection with fasteners and related hardware … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Trademark & Trade Dress, TTAB | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc. – U.S. Supreme Court Holds TTAB Decisions Can Have Preclusive Effect on District Courts

In In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC,[1] the first ever appeal of the final written decision from an inter partes review (“IPR”) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB” or the “Board”),[2] the Federal Circuit decided two novel and … Continue reading

Posted in Patent Litigation | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Not So Fast: Split Federal Circuit Panel Sided with PTO on Novel IPR Issues

It’s not just the Redskins anymore!  Following the cancellation of the Redskins trademark earlier this summer, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board has issued another football related decision regarding the New York Giants’ trademark of their commonly used nickname, the … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Trademark & Trade Dress, TTAB | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on A “Giant” Decision: Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Denies Registration of “G-Men” to the New York Giants

Six days after the Supreme Court handed down its opinion in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, which invalidated certain patents disclosing “a computer-implemented scheme for mitigating ‘settlement risk,’” the USPTO issued its own Preliminary Examination Instructions. (An overview of the … Continue reading

Posted in Patent Litigation | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on The USPTO’s Response to Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank