LOS ANGELES - On the heels of a March 9 recommendation by a California federal magistrate judge that a copyright infringement plaintiff should be sanctioned for failure to comply with a discovery order, a California federal judge on March 31 granted a defendant partial summary judgment with regard to 11 of 12 allegedly infringing fabric designs (Urban Textile v. Rue 21 Inc. and Mark Edwards Apparel Inc., No. 14-8285, C.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49573).
SAN FRANCISCO - In a March 29 reply brief in California federal court, Apple Inc. defended its motion to compel discovery of documents from a lawsuit in the United Kingdom, contending that "they may bear on whether [Unwired Planet LLC's] damages demand" in the present patent case "constitutes a 'reasonable' royalty" (Unwired Planet LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 3:13-cv-04134, N.D. Calif.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Efforts by a defendant to obtain a new trial in a dispute over the "La Indita Michoacana" trademark in light of newly discovered evidence were denied March 30 by a District of Columbia federal judge (Paleteria La Michoacana Inc., et al. v. Productos Lacteos Tocumbo S.A. De C.V., No. 11-1623, D. D.C.).
ATLANTA - An 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on March 29 affirmed summary judgment in favor of a delicatessen in a lawsuit in which a restaurant chain franchisor said the deli's name infringed on its registered service mark, saying the complaint was barred by laches (Groucho's Franchise Systems LLC v. Grouchy's Deli Inc., No. 16-16279, 11th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5437).
CHICAGO - All previous pleadings by counsel for three common-law trademark defendants were stricken March 28 by an Illinois federal judge as a sanction for ethics violations (Lectric Limited v. DGW Inc., No. 15-7744, N.D. Ill., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44867).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. - The Patent Trial and Appeal Board on March 24 granted a patent owner's request to cancel 19 claims of a single-serve beverage brewing machine patent, on the heels of a January decision by the board that granted inter partes review (Keurig Green Mountain Inc. v. Touch Coffee & Beverages LLC, No. IPR2016-01394, PTAB).
NEW ORLEANS - A Texas federal judge did not err in granting a defendant summary judgment on the question of direct copyright infringement because the judge properly found an absence of volitional conduct, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled March 27 (BWP Media USA, et al. v. T&S Software Associates, No. 16-10510, 5th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5340).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals' finding that Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) safe-harbor provisions apply to pre-1972 recordings will stand, as the U.S. Supreme Court on March 27 denied a group of record labels' petition for certiorari in their dispute with an online video-sharing service that they accused of infringing their copyrighted works (Capitol Records LLC, et al. v. Vimeo LLC, et al., No. 16-771, U.S. Sup., 2017 U.S. LEXIS 2055).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. - A claimed method of processing merchandise discounts based upon a computerized membership system does not pass muster under Section 101 of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. 1 et seq., the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ruled March 27 in a final written decision (The Kroger Company, et al. v. Nexuscard Inc., No. CBM2015-00183, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A challenger of a dentistry patent prevailed before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board March 26 when in a final written decision the board deemed four claims obvious in light of three pieces of prior art (ClearCorrect Operating LLC v. Align Technology Inc., No. IPR2016-00270, PTAB).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. - Asserting eight separate grounds of unpatentability, Twitter Inc. on March 24 took aim at a patent directed at creating and sharing web content in a new petition for inter partes review (IPR) with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Twitter Inc. v. Yootoo Technologies LLC, No. IPR2017-01131, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A petitioner told the U.S. Supreme Court on March 27 that venue is proper only in a defendant's place of incorporation and that, accordingly, allegations of patent infringement by Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC should have been levied in Indiana federal court and not in Delaware, where allegedly infringing products were shipped (TC Heartland LLC d/b/a Heartland Food Products Group v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, No. 16-341, U.S. Sup.).
NEW ORLEANS - The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 24 denied an architect's appeal seeking to reverse a ruling in favor of a home builder's insurer in a breach of contract dispute arising from an underlying $63,471,000 copyright infringement dispute, rejecting the architect's argument that an unobjected-to proof of claim in a bankruptcy case should be allowed and should become a final judgment when the bankruptcy case is closed (Kipp Flores Architects, LLC v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co., No. 16-20255, 5th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5241).
FORT WAYNE, Ind. - Efforts by a copyright infringement defendant to obtain summary judgment were unsuccessful on March 24 when an Indiana federal judge found that the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 1962 (2014), did not change the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals' "discovery rule" for determining when an allegation of infringement has accrued (Design Basics LLC v. Westport Homes of Fort Wayne Inc., et al., No. 16-170, N.D. Ind., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43060).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - On the heels of its March 21 decision in SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products, LLC, 580 U. S. ___ (2017), the U.S. Supreme Court on March 27 granted petitions for certiorari in three patent cases for the limited purpose of vacating and remanding to the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Medinol Ltd. v. Cordis Corp., et al., No. 15-998; Endotach LLC v. Cook Medical LLC, No. 16-127; Romag Fasteners Inc. v. Fossil Inc., et al., No. 16-202, U.S. Sup.).
ERIE, Pa. - A second expert report filed by the lead plaintiffs in a proposed class action over spying software when they filed their reply brief in support of their renewed motion for class certification was filed too late, a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge ruled March 22, striking the new report (Crystal Byrd, et al. v. Aaron's, Inc., et al., No. 11-101, W.D. Pa., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41030).
PASADENA, Calif. - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 21 dismissed an insured's appeal in an advertising injury coverage dispute after a lower federal court determined on remand that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case (Vogue International, LLC, d.b.a. Vogue International v. Hartford Casualty Insurance Co., No. 14-56394, 9th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5011).
PASADENA, Calif. - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 21 affirmed a lower federal court's $6,080,568 judgment in favor of an insured in a breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit against its excess general liability insurer arising from an underlying patent infringement dispute (Teleflex Medical Incorporated v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa., No. 14-56366, 9th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 4996).
TYLER, Texas - In a patent infringement lawsuit, an expert may provide opinions "based on his technical knowledge and expertise" as to the technical advantages of a claimed process of forming circuitry used in controlling liquid crystal displays (LCDs), a Texas federal magistrate judge ruled March 22 (Eidos Display LLC and Eidos III LLC v. Chi Mei Innolux Corp., et al., No. 11-00201, E.D. Texas, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41040).
ALBANY, N.Y. - Citing evidence that a defendant acted outside the scope of its licensing agreement with a plaintiff, as well as evidence that the defendant used a trademark identical to that of a plaintiff, a New York federal judge on March 22 granted partial summary judgment in a dispute over sports protective eyewear (Halo Optical Products Inc. v. Liberty Sport Inc., No. 14-282, N.D. N.Y., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41084).
OAKLAND, Calif. - A California federal judge on March 22 granted in part a motion for summary judgment by Apple Inc., finding that the plaintiffs in a putative antitrust class action failed to establish the primary alleged aftermarket for iPhone voice and data services related to claimed service exclusivity through AT&T Mobility, but the judge deemed a narrower aftermarket related to iPhones not unlocked for service provider exclusivity sufficiently alleged (Zack Ward, et al. v. Apple Inc., No. 4:12-cv-05404, N.D. Calif.).
NEW ORLEANS - A dismissal with prejudice of a complaint seeking a declaration of patent noninfringement and that no trade secrets were misappropriated was correct, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled March 20 in a dispute over gas-to-liquid (GTL) conversion technology (Sasol North America Inc., et al. v. GTLPetrol LLC, No. 16-20122, 5th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5107).
PHILADELPHIA - A child pornography suspect was correctly found to be in contempt when he refused to comply with a court order requiring him to provide law enforcement with access to external hard drives, a Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled March 20, finding that the defendant's rights under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution were not violated (United States of America v. Apple Mac Pro Computer, et al., No. 15-3537, 3rd Cir.; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 4874).
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - A majority of a Florida appeals court on March 20 affirmed a lower court's ruling that an insurer's quarterly supplemental reporting (QUASR) data satisfies the definition of trade secret under state law and is, therefore, exempt from public disclosure (Office of Insurance Regulation v. State Farm Florida Ins. Co., No. 1D16-2301, Fla. App., 1st Dist., 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 3662).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A tribunal for the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) on March 20 issued its final award in a dispute over Canadian drug patents, dismissing all of a pharmaceutical company's claims and finding that the invalidation of the patents by Canadian courts did not constitute violations of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) (Eli Lilly and Company v. Government of Canada, No. UNCT/14/2, ICSID).