Readers of this blog may recall that in the past year, I wrote extensively about the U.S. Supreme Court case of Oil States v. Greene’s Energy. But I paid little attention to another important case decided around the same time: SAS Institute v. Iancu. Oil States centered on whether the USPTO’s inter partes review
Chief Justice John Roberts Talks Trademarks
It’s not every day you’re presented with the unique opportunity of seeing and hearing the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court live in your own backyard, thanks very much Caleb!
Tuesday was that day, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. was here in Minneapolis for the 2018 Stein Lecture at the University
UGG Is Not Synonymous With A Type of Boot
The popular UGG® branded sheepskin boots are at the heart of a dispute in the Northern District of Illinois. Deckers Outdoor Corp. (“Deckers”) owns 29 federal registrations for the trademark UGG in connection with numerous goods and services, including footwear, clothing, wallets, passport covers, plush toys and retail store services. The company also has four
Amazon’s Worker Cages and Some Reminders on the Publicity and Value of Patents
— Jessica Gutierrez Alm, Attorney
Amazon’s patent (U.S. Patent No. 9,280,157) for a “System and Method for Transporting Personnel Within an Active Workspace” has been in the news recently.
The invention is described as a device for keeping human workers safe in an automated (i.e., robotic) work environment. In the Background, the patent discusses the
Mohawk Tribe v. Mylan Highlights USPTO Constraints
Credit: Federal Circuit (what it looks like to argue there)
One week ago, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision in Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 18-1638 (Fed. Cir. July 20, 2018)–by all accounts, one of this decade’s most important decisions concerning the America Invents Act and the
Can a YouTube Video Invalidate a Patent? It’s Certainly Possible
One of the most common defenses to patent infringement is that the asserted patent is invalid. The reasons for invalidity regularly range from lack of utility, to incorrect inventorship, and even to fraud (as I’ve recently written about). Often, the defendant asserts that the patent is invalid for lack of novelty or non-obviousness–pointing
PTAB-Lovers Rejoice; IPR Lives!
Five months ago to the day, I predicted that the U.S. Supreme Court would uphold inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) as constitutional in Oil States v. Greene Energy. On April 24, 2018, the Court so-held.
Back in November, the questions at
White Color Trademark Goes Up in Flames
A couple of years ago, our friend John Welch over at the TTABlog reported about a white color trademark that had acquired distinctiveness, according to a rare precedential TTAB decision:
No, that’s not a roll of toilet paper, it’s a preformed gunpowder charge for use in muzzleloading rifles. And the applied-for mark
Patent Appeals to the District Court: Win or Lose, You Pay Attorneys’ Fees?
Recently, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals (the federal appellate court that primarily hears appeals in patents cases) heard arguments in NantKwest Inc. v. Matal, No. 16-1794 on the issue of attorneys’ fees (a timely topic) in certain patent cases.
Credit: PatentlyO
Attorneys’ fees are a necessary and inescapable cost of enforcing
Patent IPRs and Allergan’s Sovereign Immunity Defense
— Jessica Gutierrez Alm, Attorney
In an age of rising healthcare costs, pharmaceutical companies can be an easy target in calls for patent reform. Patent protection helps drug manufacturers recoup their investment in developing the new drug,. It also prevents generic manufacturers from releasing the same drug formulation at lower cost. The Hatch-Waxman Act provides