This week in Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Hospira, Inc., Supr. Ct. No. 15-1210, the Supreme Court is scheduled to vote whether to grant certiorari on the issue of secondary considerations ...
Monday morning (May 23, 2016), the Supreme Court may announce whether it has granted certiorari inDow Chemical Co. v. Nova Chemicals Corp. (Canada), Supr.Ct. No. 15-1160, proceedings below, 803 F.3d ...
The Board dismissed this opposition to registration of the mark WOD Snob for decorative magnets and athletic apparel because opposers, claiming common law rights in WODSNOB for athletic apparel, failed ...
Looking ahead to the 2016 Term of the Court that runs through June 2017, seven of the Top Ten Patent Cases are selected in the attached abbreviated list which considers cases ...
The Board affirmed refusals to register the mark MAGNESITA for refractory bricks and related products, on the ground of genericness, and for providing information via a global computer network regarding ...
By now, most patent practitioners have a fairly sophisticated understanding of the “new” (five year old) patent law, the Leahy Smith America Invent Act. Everyone knows that it is very ...
In Top Ten No. (7) Life Techs. Corp. v. Promega Corp., Supreme Court No. 14-1538, the Solicitor General has now filed his CVSG amicus brief. He recommends that the Court ...
Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. May 12, 2016)(Hughes, J.), is a an important decision dealing with software patent-eligibility, but only because it is a rare ...
Stanford University Law School Professor Mark A. Lemley’s impressive amicus brief in Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Fed. Cir. 2016-1284, was noted earlier today, contrasted with the ...
The USPTO refused registration of the mark shown below for "financial analysis and consultation," deeming it to be a phantom mark - i.e., a mark with a changeable element - ...