MINNEAPOLIS - Both sides motions' to exclude expert witness testimony in an unfair competition dispute over Symantec Corp.'s so-called download insurance were denied by a Minnesota federal judge March 19, albeit with some restrictions (Devi Khoday, et al. v. Symantec Corp., et al., No. 0:11-cv-00180, D. Minn.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34953).
PASADENA, Calif. - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 19 vacated a $20 million settlement in a class suit over unauthorized charges in light of the Feb. 27 decision in Frank v. Netflix (In re Online DVD-Rental Antitrust Litig.) (No. 12-15705, 9th Cir.) and remanded for further proceedings (In re: Easysaver Rewards Litigation, No. 13-55373, 9th Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4494).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Less than two weeks after the Federal Communications Commission released its comprehensive report and order on "Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet," a trade association of telecommunications service providers and suppliers (telecoms) on March 23 filed a petition seeking the review of the order in the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, asserting that the order violates the U.S. Constitution and federal law (United States Telecom Association v. Federal Communications Commission, et al., No. 15-1063, D.C. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - An October 2014 holding that a defendant's infringement was not willful will stand, thanks to a March 23 denial of a petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Halo Electronics Inc. v. Pulse Electronics Inc., et al., Nos. 13-1472, -1656, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erroneously ruled that the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) applies a different likelihood of confusion standard when weighing a trademark registration than district courts apply when weighing allegations of infringement, a divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled March 24 (B&B Hardware Inc. v. Hargis Industries Inc., No. 13-352, U.S. Sup.).
SEATTLE - A trial court abused its discretion when it struck class allegations in a lawsuit that alleges that there was a design defect in Microsoft Corp.'s Xbox 360 video game console that results in gouged game discs, a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel majority ruled March 18 (Seth Baker, et al. v. Microsoft Corporation, No. 12-35946, 9th Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4317).
WILMINGTON, Del. - A Delaware federal judge on March 20 partly granted and partly denied motions to exclude expert testimony filed by both parties in a patent infringement lawsuit related to power supply technology (Fairchild Semiconductor Corp., et al. v. Power Integrations Inc., No. 1:12-cv-00540, D. Del.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34873).
CHICAGO - An Illinois appeals panel on March 20 affirmed a lower court's ruling that an insurer has no duty to defend or indemnify its insured against underlying claims that it violated Microsoft Corp.'s intellectual property rights by selling computers that were loaded with unauthorized copies of Microsoft's software (Erie Insurance Exchange v. Compeve Corp., et al., No. 1-14-2508, Ill. App., 1st Dist., 5th Div.; 2015 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 561).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A Delaware federal judge properly construed various disputed phrases in two injectable acetaminophen patents and correctly concluded that a defendant infringed those asserted claims, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held March 23 (Cadence Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. v. Exela PharmSci Inc., et al., No. 14-1184, Fed. Cir.).
PHILADELPHIA - A motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) by two textbook makers following an adverse jury verdict in a copyright case was rejected March 20 by a Pennsylvania federal judge (Grant Heilman Photography Inc. v. McGraw-Hill Global Holdings LLC, et al., No. 12-2061, E.D. Pa.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34813).
ST. PAUL, Minn. - The Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 19 affirmed that because a general and personal liability insurance policy bars coverage for defamation committed with an intent to injure, the insurer has no duty to defend against claims that an orthodontist posted online defamatory comments about a competitor (Sletten & Brettin Orthodontics, LLC, et al. v. Continental Casualty Co., et al., No. 13-2918, 8th Cir.).
NEW YORK - Claims by a former union member and his wife that they were defamed in a union newsletter that was printed and also published on a website hosted by GoDaddy.com LLC all fail because the claims against the union are time-barred and the website host is entitled to immunity, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled March 18 (Peter Ricci, et al. v. Teamsters Union Local 456, et al., No. 14-1732, 2nd Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4303).
SAN FRANCISCO - Declaratory judgment counterclaims of patent noninfringement and invalidity can proceed because they are not barred by any provision in the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA), a California federal judge ruled March 19 (Amgen Inc., et al. v. Sandoz Inc., et al., No. 14-4741, N.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34537).
ATLANTA - A photographer need not pay a partly prevailing copyright infringement defendant its attorney fees because the photographer's allegation of removal of copyright management information (CMI) "was not entirely without merit," according to a March 19 ruling by a Georgia federal judge (Iran Watson v. Kappa Map Group LLC, No. 14-100, N.D. Ga.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33852).
ATLANTA - A Florida federal judge properly found that plaintiff Sandshaker Lounge and Package Store LLC had no protectable rights in the "bushwacker" trademark because it is "a generic term for a chocolaty frozen drink containing rum and coffee liqueur," the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled March 19 (Sandshaker Lounge and Package Store LLC v. Quietwater Entertainment Inc., No. 14-14481, 11th Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4419).
WILMINGTON, Del. - Allegations that AOL Advertising Inc. infringed two patents relating to online business transactions were rejected March 18 by a Delaware federal judge (Priceplay.com Inc. v. AOL Advertising Inc., No. 14-92, D. Del.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33151).
MINNEAPOLIS - A group of consumer plaintiffs in a consolidated lawsuit over a 2013 data breach experienced by Target Corp., filed a motion for approval in Minnesota federal court on March 18, stating that they had reached a settlement in which the retailer agreed to pay $10 million to settle all of the consumers' claims against it (In re: Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 0:14-md-02522, D. Minn.).
CINCINNATI - An Ohio federal judge properly granted a defendant summary judgment on allegations of copyright infringement, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled March 18 (Stolle Machinery Company LLC v. RAM Precision Industries et al., No. 13-4103, 6th Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4403).
HARRISBURG, Pa. - Two groups of plaintiffs in consolidated class complaints accusing a payroll service company of breach of contract and other violations following a breach of their computer system lack standing to sue because they present no evidence of actual injury, a Pennsylvania federal judge ruled March 13 (Daniel B. Storm, et al. v. Paytime, Inc., Barbara Holt, et al. v. Paytime Harrisburg, Inc., d/b/a Paytime, Inc., No. 14-1138, M.D. Pa.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31286).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - An Oregon federal judge, acting on remand following reinstatement of a jury verdict of patent infringement, did not err in denying a defendant the opportunity to relitigate the question of patent validity, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled March 18 (Smith & Nephew Inc. v. Arthrex Inc., Nos. 14-1691, -1694, Fed. Cir.).
SAN FRANCISCO - Rideshare application (app) operator Uber Technologies Inc. may subpoena the operator of 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 March 16, granting Uber's discovery motion (Uber Technologies Inc. v. John Doe I, No. 3:15-cv-00908, N.D. Calif.).
TYLER, Texas - A Texas federal jury on March 16 deemed Apple not liable for infringement of five standard-essential wireless patents (Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc., No. 12-100, E.D. Texas).
CHICAGO - Allegations by Par Sterile Products LLC that a defendant misrepresented its vasopressin injection as safe, effective and approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in violation of the Lanham Act will proceed in part, an Illinois federal judge ruled March 17 (Par Sterile Products LLC v. Fresenius KABI USA LLC, No. 14-3349, N.D. Ill.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32409).
CAMDEN, N.J. - Immunity conferred on interactive computer service providers by the Communications Decency Act (CDA) led a New Jersey federal judge on March 13 to dismiss negligence claims against a gay social network operator that a man alleged was negligent and, therefore, liable for claims against him related to a sexual encounter with an underage user of the network (William F. Saponaro Jr. v. Grindr LLC, No. 1:14-cv-04522, D. N.J.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30795).