PHILADELPHIA - Although a trial court judge correctly found that the New Jersey Supreme Court's new rule regarding the state's Truth-in-Consumer Contract, Warrant and Notice Act (TCCWNA) was not fully retroactive, a Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on April 30 ruled that the new rule should apply to the present plaintiffs that had alleged violation of the act by Restaurant.com Inc. in a putative class complaint (Larissa Shelton, et al. v. Restaurant.com Inc., No. 14-3316, 3rd Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 7145).
NEW YORK - A New York appeals panel on April 30 withdrew Sony's appeal of a lower court's finding that there is no coverage for a data breach caused by a cyber-attack of Sony's online networks, one day after Sony and its insurers filed a stipulation to discontinue the coverage lawsuit with prejudice (Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Sony Corporation of America, et al., Nos. 14547, 14546, N.Y. App., 1st Dept.).
KANSAS CITY, Kan. - A renewed motion to dismiss was granted April 29 by a Kansas federal judge in a dispute over copyrighted fish illustrations (Joseph Tomelleri v. MEDL Mobile Inc., et al., No. 14-2113, D. Kan.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55943).
OAKLAND, Calif. - After seeing its motion to dismiss a complaint by the Federal Trade Commission denied in California federal court, AT&T Mobility LLC filed an answer April 28 in which it denies any violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act), asserting that "consumers have not suffered any substantial injury or damage as a result of any alleged conduct" (Federal Trade Commission v. AT&T Mobility LLC, No. 3:14-cv-04785, N.D. Calif.).
ATLANTA - A Georgia federal judge erroneously invalidated a copyright on a 2-D laminate flooring design, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 29 (Home Legend LLC v. Mannington Mills Inc., No. 14-13440, 11th Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 7075).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. - In light of a finding that a transfer of 14 domain names was done with a bad faith intent to profit and of a John Doe defendant's failure to respond to a cybersquatting complaint, a Virginia federal magistrate judge on April 28 recommended granting a plaintiff's motion for default judgment and transferring the disputed domains back to the plaintiff's control (Acme Billing Co. v. John Doe, No. 1:14-cv-01379, E.D. Va.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A dispute over whether the defense of laches is available as a bar to patent infringement lawsuits in which money damages or injunctive relief are sought will be heard by the full Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 19, the court announced April 29 (SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag, et al. v. First Quality Baby Products LLC, No. 13-1564, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A Louisiana federal judge's decision to treble a jury's damage award in a patent case was vacated April 29 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in light of the panel's rejection of the jury's determination of willful infringement (Innovention Toys LLC v. MGA Entertainment Inc. et al., No. 14-1731, Fed. Cir.).
LAS VEGAS - A motion in limine by six patent infringement defendants to partially exclude the testimony of a plaintiff's expert witness at trial was granted April 28 by a Nevada federal judge (2-Way Computing Inc. v. Sprint Solutions Inc. et al., No. 11-12, D. Nev.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55479).
LEXINGTON, Ky. - A breach of contract case was stayed, in part, on April 28 by a Kentucky federal judge pending re-examination of two patents by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Natural Alternatives LLC v. JM Farms, No. 12-333, E.D. Ky.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55271).
DENVER - A Colorado federal judge on April 24 granted a blog administrator's motion for attorney fees in a case in which he achieved dismissal due to lack of jurisdiction, with the judge finding that a Colorado statute's attorney fees provision did not conflict with federal law (Advanced Career Technologies Inc. v. John Does 1-10, et al., No. 1:130cv-00304, D. Colo.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53941).
SAN FRANCISCO - Rideshare application (app) operator Uber Technologies Inc. may subpoena an Internet service provider (ISP) and a third-party website in its effort to uncover the identity of a John Doe defendant responsible for a data breach incident, a California federal magistrate judge ruled April 27, granting Uber's discovery motions, as well as a motion to seal those motions (Uber Technologies Inc. v. John Doe I, No. 3:15-cv-00908, N.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54915).
LOS ANGELES - A California woman on April 24 filed a class action lawsuit in federal court, accusing an online computer backup service provider of violating several state laws, including the unfair competition law (UCL), for failing to back up data as required, causing consumers to lose their data because they could neither restore nor retrieve the data in violation of several state laws (Sherry Orson v. Carbonite Inc., No. 15-3097, C.D. Calif.).
NEW YORK - Competing motions for summary judgment in a dispute over the "RLX" trademark were denied March 31, according to a ruling released April 27 by a New York federal judge (Rolex Watch USA Inc. v. PRL USA Holdings Inc., No. 12-6006, S.D. N.Y.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54766).
LOS ANGELES - Citing the "unnecessary joinder" of "an extremely large number of defendants," a California federal judge on April 24 sanctioned a copyright infringement plaintiff and its counsel (We 3 Kings Inc. v. The Steve Harvey Show et al., No. 14-8816, C.D. Calif.).
PHILADELPHIA - The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 27 rejected a plaintiff's claim that "substantial justice" requires that the "registration requirement" for filing a copyright infringement action be overlooked (Gregory Markantone DPM v. Podiatric Billing Specialists LLC, No. 14-3097, 3rd Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 6899).
CINCINNATI - An Ohio federal judge's summary judgment dismissal of trademark infringement claims on res judicata grounds was vacated and remanded April 24 by the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (A Metal Source LLC v. All Metal Sales Inc., et al., No. 14-3951, 6th Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 6836).
SAN FRANCISCO - Although admittedly "concerned about the sizable amount" of actual damages claimed by a copyright infringement plaintiff, a California federal judge on April 23 nonetheless ordered two defaulting defendants to pay $1.6 million (FormFactor Inc. v. Mr. Prober Technology Inc. et al., No. 13-3688, N.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53637).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - An Ohio federal judge's construction of "when a caller is placed on hold" was not improper, a panel of the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 24 (Info-Hold Inc. v. Muzak LLC, No. 14-1167, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - One week after affirming the denial of a trademark registration of "The Slants" on disparagement grounds, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 27, acting sua sponte, granted en banc rehearing (In re: Simon Shiao Tam, No. 14-1203, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Acting on remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 27 maintained its previous holding that a heart rate monitor patent is not indefinite (Biosig Instruments Inc. v. Nautilus Inc., No. 12-1289, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on April 27 granted certiorari to an online data aggregation service in a case pertaining to whether the lead plaintiff in a putative action brought under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) needs to establish an injury in fact to have standing to sue under Article III of the U.S. Constitution (Spokeo, Inc. v. Thomas Robins, et al., No. 13-1339, U.S. Sup.).
KANSAS CITY, Kan. - A Kansas federal judge on April 21 found that a tire retailer insured has failed to establish that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether an insurer breached a duty to acknowledge the insured's right to its own counsel of choice, granting the insurer's motion for partial summary judgment in a dispute over coverage for a trademark infringement lawsuit (AKH Company Inc. v. Universal Underwriters Insurance Co., No. 13-2003, D. Kan.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52056).
NASHVILLE, Tenn. - A copyright infringement defendant is entitled to $80,295 in attorney fees and costs as a prevailing party, a Tennessee federal judge ruled April 23 (Taryn Murphy, et al. v. Sergey Lazarov, No. 10-530, M.D. Tenn.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53428).
RICHMOND, Va. - The imposition of all expenses on a plaintiff in an ex parte trademark proceeding, regardless of whether that plaintiff prevails, "does not constitute fee-shifting that implicates the American Rule," a divided Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 23 (Milo Shammas v. Margaret A. Focarino, Commissioner of Patents, and David Kappos, Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, No. 14-1191, 4th Cir.).