The US Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) held in In re Bay State Brewing Company, Inc., Serial No. 85826258 (TTAB, February 25, 2016) that a consent agreement may not necessarily overcome a likelihood of confusion rejection by trademark examining attorney. At issue in the case was whether TIME TRAVEL BLONDE…

On February 10, 2016 the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) decided the case of Convolve, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology v. Compaq Computer Corp. and Seagate Technology, Inc. (February 10, 2016, 2014-1732, CAFC). The technology at issue in the case involved improvements in computer hard drives described in US Patent No. 6,314,473…

On February 11, 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) decided the case of Nike, Inc., V. Adidas AG, 2014-1719 (CAFC, February 11, 2016), in which Adidas filed an inter partes review (IPR) of US Patent No. 7,347, 011 (the ‘011 patent), owned by Nike. The USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal…

In Rosebud LMS INC. v. Adobe Systems Incorporated (CAFC, 2015-1428, February 9, 2016) the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed the District Court’s grant of summary judgment that Adobe Systems Inc. was not liable for pre-issuance damages under 3 5 U. S. C. Section 154 (d). Rosebud filed three suits against Adobe…

On January 15, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the appealability of decisions to institute an Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) and the appropriate claim construction standard to be used in IPR proceedings. In IN RE: CUOZZO SPEED TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, 2014-1301 (CAFC, July 8, 2015),…

© 1994-2017 Intella IP - All Rights Reserved Worldwide