Quantcast
Home (page 7)

Tag Archives: Intellectual Property

Patent Case Transferred for ‘Customer Suit’ (access required)

Although plaintiff’s patent infringement suits involving technology for no-envelope cash and check deposits in automated teller machines were first-filed in Virginia federal courts, the Norfolk U.S. District Court applies the “customer suit” exception and transfers these cases to a federal ...

Read More »

No Jurisdiction for Patent ‘Partial’ IPR (access required)

An Alexandria U.S. District Court does not have jurisdiction to review a decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to institute “partial” inter partes review proceedings of patentability of the subject claims; the language and legislative history of the ...

Read More »

Fee Award Based on ‘Reasonable’ Virginia Rates (access required)

In these international business tort cases involving tire manufacturers’ trade secrets and a final jury verdict of $26 million for plaintiff, the Alexandria U.S. District Court concludes the appropriate value of the law firm lien filed by plaintiffs’ former law ...

Read More »

No Boundaries Stated for ‘Beard Hat’ Mark (access required)

In this trademark infringement action involving two standard character marks used to brand and market knitted beards, a Richmond U.S. District Court says the defendant states counterclaims for trademark infringement and anticybersquatting, but dismisses a counterclaim for unfair competition as ...

Read More »

Bio-Patent Case Stayed for IPR (access required)

In this patent case involving development of automated technologies to minimize degradation of stored biological samples in ultra-low temperature freezers, the Charlottesville U.S. District Court grants defendant company’s motion to stay proceedings pending conclusion of inter partes review of the ...

Read More »

Court Cuts Lawyers’ Fee for Protective Order (access required)

When parties in this intellectual property case could not agree on the terms of a confidentiality order meant to protect defendant’s sensitive financial information, a Norfolk U.S. District Court decided defendant was not substantially justified in insisting upon an “Attorney’s ...

Read More »