Patent Infringement
March 22, 2012
Patenting Nature
This past Tuesday, a unanimous (9-0) Supreme Court, in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, gave further instruction on patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §101. This was the first time the Supreme Court had addressed the issue since the hotly debated Bilski decision last year.
November 1, 2011
The Federal Circuit Waves Good-bye to the Presumption of Irreparable Harm for Patent Injunction Requests
The Federal Circuit joined the Ninth Circuit and the Second Circuit in deciding that the Supreme Court’s Ebay decision rejects the presumption of irreparable harm in patent infringement cases. This presumption is employed by some district courts when determining whether an injunction is suitable. Before Ebay, the Federal Circuit generally followed the rule that “a permanent injunction will issue once infringement and validity have been adjudged, absent a sound reason to deny relief.” Further, in the context of preliminary injunctions, the Court applied “an express presumption of irreparable harm upon a finding that a plaintiff was likely to succeed on the merits.” In Ebay, the Supreme Court stated the patentee must show: it suffered irreparable injury, the remedies at law are inadequate to compensate the injury, considering the balance of hardships an equitable remedy is warranted, and public interest is not disserved by the injunction.
August 12, 2011
Yves Saint Laurent vs Louboutin: A New York District Court Orders No Preliminary Injunction Against Yves Saint Laurent and Puts Louboutin’s Red Sole Trademark in Jeopardy
A district court for the Southern District of New York denied Christian Louboutin’s motion for preliminary injunction against high-end shoe competitor Yves Saint Laurent for Lanham Act violations. Louboutin shoes are well known for their red soles, which “[f]ilm stars and other A-list notables equally pay homage” and often cost as much as $1000 a pair. Even though “the red outsole became closely associated with Louboutin” and the United States Patent and Trademark Office granted Louboutin a trademark registration for the color as part of a “lacquered red sole on footware” mark, the Court decided that color, in this context is aesthetic and does not act as a source identifier.
October 15, 2010
Supreme Court Grants Cert. to Review Whether “Deliberate Indifference” Is Enough for Inducement
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Global-Tech Appliances Inc. v. SEB S.A. to review the intent required to induce infringement under 35 USC § 271(b). The question for review, as the Supreme Court frames it, is whether “deliberate indifference of a known risk” of infringement is sufficient, or whether there must be “purposeful, culpable expression and conduct” encouraging infringement.
Share This Page With Your Phone!
RSS
Newsletter
Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
