Patent & IP news for March 14, 2010

Patent Litigations

  • No new litigations this day!



Patent & IP Blogs

post image Himalayan case: Delhi HC rules on 'scope' of TM Registrar's role from

The Delhi High Court recently decided a question on the role of the Registrar of Trade Marks, and defined the limits within which the office ought to operate, in a case involving two players in ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

post image Letter from AmeriKat II - Kibbles 'n Bits from

NY swipes in for Tavern on the Green - The AmeriKat previously reported about the struggle between the owners of Tavern on the Green, the LeRoys, and the New York City to the rights to the ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Federal Circuit Jurisdiction over Declaratory Judgment Actions from

Laboratory Corp of America (LabCorp) v. Metabolite Labs., Appeal No. 2008-1597 (Fed. Cir. 2010). In an interesting exposition on Federal Circuit appellate jurisdiction, the court has ruled that LabCorp's appeal should be heard by ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

A response to Francisco Prieto's vision for CIRM's IP from

Francisco Prieto made a comment to a post on californiastemcellreport [titled
School Children vs. Stem Cell Scientists; A Public Perception Problem
] which comment included the text:

Whatever my own (somewhat jaundiced) view might be of ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Settling with Civility in Patent Litigation from

In the case of Henryk Oleksy v. General Electric Company, et al (ILND 1-06-cv-01245), a settlement conference occurred recently. Quite a normal activity in patent litigation cases. But something about this particular entry caught our ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Credibility issues with Sikes' Prius story? from

An AP story titled Investigators raise questions in Prius incident includes the text:

During two hours of test drives of Sikes’ car Thursday, technicians with Toyota and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration failed to ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

FICCI-MSME IPR Awareness Programme from

Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) in association with Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises (MSME) have taken the initiative to conduct an IPR awareness programmes at various cities across India for ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Para IV lawsuit against Mylan and Famy Care for OC pills from

Teva has lately filed civil actions against the generic manufacturers Mylan and Mumbai-based Famy Care Limited for infringement of US Pat No. 7,320,969 and 7,615,545 listed with the OB for oral ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Guest Post: Challenging Pre-Grant Orders Through Writ Petitions: Delhi HC Clarifies from

In 2 earlier posts, I had discussed in detail the decision of the Delhi High Court ruling that rejection of patent applications in pre-grant oppositions are appealable before the IPAB. A guest post too was ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Business models and open IP platforms in personalized medicine from

Personalized Medicine is a frequently discussed concept in healthcare thought to hold great value for the future. Since I am currently involved in a project where the technology could provide utilities for personalized medicine while ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Accounting Inhibits R&D from

Accounting rules for R&D; result in companies and nations under investing in research and development (R&D;). Since increases in real per capita income are the result of increases in our level of technology ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Remember the “one-click” patent controversy? from

Patently-O and TechFlash have reported that’s highly-debated “one-click” patent,  U.S. Patent 5,960,411, is about to survive reexamination by the USPTO with its claims largely unchanged.  The “one-click” patent covers ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Ex parte Tanaka on appeal at the Federal Circuit from

Recently I posted (here) about Ex parte Tanaka, the precedential BPAI decision that held that reissue is not proper for adding dependent claims when issued claims remain in the application, since merely adding new dependents ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Some content © 2007–2014 RPX Corporation.
Terms of Service & Privacy Policy
For DMCA requests contact