Kwan Software Eng'g, Inc. v. Foray Techs., LLC
Independent development constituted complete defense to copyright infringement and DMCA claims.
Area(s) of Law:- Copyright
- , Infringement, DCMA
Loftness Specialized Farm Equip., Inc. v. Twiestmeyer
A breach of a non-disclosure agreement alone formed the basis of an action even though the information protected by the non-disclosure agreement would not otherwise be entitled to trade secret protection.
Area(s) of Law:- Trade Secrets
- , Nondisclosure agreements
Tempo Lighting, Inc. v. Tivoli, LLC
The definition of a term claimed in one applicant's original prosecution was treated as intrinsic evidence when construing the claim of the same term in another applicant's application.
Area(s) of Law:- Patents
- , Claim Construction
Fort Properties, Inc. v. American Master Lease, LLC
Simply adding a “computer aided” limitation to a claim covering an abstract concept, without more, is insufficient to render the claim patent eligible.
Area(s) of Law:- Patents
Roger Miller Music Inc. v. Sony/ATV Publishing, LLC
If an assignee becomes a registered owner of the copyright and renewal rights in a song while the author is alive and before the rights have vested, then the author cannot will those rights to someone else upon his death.
Area(s) of Law:- Copyright
Yesh Music v. Lakewood Church
A licensing agreement does not entitle the licensee to perpetual use of the composition for post expiration productions. Also, to show that vicarious liability or infringement exists in copyright claims, the individual in question must supervise or at least have the ability to supervise the infringing activity, and the individual must have a financial interest in the allegedly infringing activity.
Area(s) of Law:- Copyright
Innovative Legal Marketing, LLC v. Market Masters-Legal
As a general rule, copyright law does not protect scenes a faire, that are incidents, characters, or settings which, as a practical matter are indispensable or standard in the treatment of a given topic, and though an “ordinary” phrase may be quoted without fear of infringement, a copier may not quote or paraphrase the sequence of creative expression that includes such a phrase.
Area(s) of Law:- Copyright
Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. v. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc.
Long contested patent with application filed on October 24, 1974 and patent finally granted on August 20, 2002. The challenge involves issues of inventorship, anticipation, obviousness, lack of written description and of willful infringement, enhanced damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, and an ongoing royalty.
Area(s) of Law:- Patents
Astrazeneca Pharmacuticals LP v. Apotex Corp.
Charging a §271(e)(2) patent infringement claim confers subject matter jurisdiction upon federal courts. In order to state a claim under §271(e)(2) for pharmaceutical use, the Abbreviated New Drug Application of the defendant must claim a use that was already patented.
Area(s) of Law:- Patents
Mettler-Toledo, Inc. v. B-Tek Scales, LLC
In determining the construction of a means-plus function claim “[a] court must look to the specification to determine the structures that correspond to the claimed function."
Area(s) of Law:- Patents
United States v. Jin
Under the Economic Espionage Act, the Government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that an economic spy intends to supply a trade secret to a benefitting nation.
Area(s) of Law:- Trademarks
Adair, Athwal, and Emtage v. Carter and Presta
"To overcome a [35 U.S.C.] § 135(b)(1) bar for a post-critical date claim, an applicant must show that such claim is not materially different from a pre-critical date claim present in the application… to obtain the benefit of the earlier filing date.”
Area(s) of Law:- Patents
Seacalt S.A. v. Wuxi Shenxi Constr. Mach. Co
Plaintiff's contention that exterior design of commercial hoist qualified for trade dress protection unavailable under Lanham Act due to a finding of functionality.
Area(s) of Law:- Trademarks
Craig Thorner v. Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC
The words of a patent claim are generally given their ordinary and customary meaning as understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art when read in the context of the specification and prosecution history.
Area(s) of Law:- Patents