Sign In With Your
In one of the first decisions to construe the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (TMA), the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit found that a district court properly applied the TMA’s rebuttal presumption of irreparable harm when it denied a trademark owner’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
The Trademark Trial & Appeal Board (Board) issued a precedential decision affirming the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) Examining Attorney’s refusal to register two different logo marks filed by southern California’s County of Orange because the marks consisted of and comprised, respectively, an insignia of a municipality.
The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed a district court decision granting summary judgment of liability under the Langham Act, finding that the plaintiffs failed to apply the correct standards for piercing the corporate veil and individual liability in a false advertising and false endorsement dispute. Edmondson et al. v. Velvet Lifestyles, LLC, Case No. 20-11315 (11th Cir. Aug. 4, 2022) (Jordan, Pryor, Marcus, JJ.)
The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a trademark infringement suit for lack of personal jurisdiction, finding that the trademark owner failed to allege that the alleged infringer could reasonably anticipate being hauled into court in Missouri. Brothers and Sisters in Christ, LLC v. Zazzle, Inc., Case No. 21-1917 (8th Cir. Aug. 2, 2022) (Smith, Benton, Kelly, JJ.)
On August 9, 2022, the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) gave a public presentation, “Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. § 101: USPTO Guidance and Policy.”
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that an artificial intelligence (AI) software system cannot be listed as an inventor on a patent application because the Patent Act requires an “inventor” to be a natural person. Thaler v. Vidal, Case No. 21-2347 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 5, 2022) (Moore, Taranto, Stark, JJ.)
The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed and vacated a district court’s preliminary injunction grant because the district court erred in assessing the strength of a trademark.
The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) issued a notice on July 29, 2022, titled “Duties of Disclosure and Reasonable Inquiry During Examination, Reexamination, and Reissue, and for Proceedings Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.”
The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit addressed issues of enhanced remedies in a dispute regarding the sale of weightlifting equipment beyond the expiration of a licensing agreement between the involved parties.
The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed a district court decision, reversing the dismissal of a copyright claim based on lack of standing and finding ownership of the copyright in the claimant based on an assignment of that claim.
Green directives on the energy performance of buildings, including energy performance certificate (EPC) ratings in the European Union and United Kingdom, are urging the European real estate industry to assess the costs of compliance.
Impacting environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) initiatives of the financial industry in Florida, on April 19, 2023, the Florida Senate passed Florida House Bill 3 (HB 3 or the Bill) by a vote of 28 YEAS to 12 NAYS.
Just three years after passing a statute significantly restricting the enforceability of physician non-compete agreements, Indiana’s legislature has passed an amendment, Senate Enrolled Act No. 7.
On April 3, 2023, the US Tax Court issued its opinion in Farhy v. Commissioner, holding that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) lacked the statutory authority to both assess tax penalties under Internal Revenue Code (Code) Section 6038(b) and collect said penalties via a levy against the taxpayer.
We said it earlier this month: With many state legislative sessions coming to an end, we were likely to see a push by states to finish up debates and votes on consumer privacy laws, and now you can count Tennessee (and Montana) among those states doing just that.
Under new legislation coined the “Coronavirus Stop Act,” employers doing business in the state of Idaho may no longer require a coronavirus vaccination as a term of employment unless required by federal law or where the terms of employment include travel to foreign jurisdictions requiring vaccination.
From changing regulatory to employment issues, get practice advisories designed just for In-House Counsel. Subscribe for free.Subscribe Now
Unlock even more great content and insights by subscribing now. It's Free!Sign Up
Already have an account? Sign In.