martindale.com
Legal Library
|
Search Results (778) Documents on Intellectual Property, Technology & Science Show: results per page Sort by:  | USPTO Launches New After Final Consideration Pilot Program to Reduce Requests for Continued Examination (RCEs)
Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff; Foley & Lardner LLP;
Legal Alert/Article May 24, 2013, previously published on May 20, 2013 In a Federal Register Notice published on May 17, 2013, the USPTO announced After Final Consideration Pilot Program 2.0 (AFCP 2.0) as part of its ongoing efforts to “reduce pendency by reducing the number of Requests for Continued Examination (RCE) and encouraging increased collaboration...
| | How to Deal with a "Patent Troll"
Dressman Benzinger LaVelle psc;
Legal Alert/Article May 24, 2013 The story always sounds the same. Our client receives a letter from a purported patent owner alleging that he is infringing the owner's patent and, as a result, owes the patent owner a license fee. Sometimes the license fee is minimal other times it is exorbitant. Typically, the letter outlines...
| | "Use" of a Mark in the U.S.A.
Cory M. Amron, Joan C. Makley, William H. Oldach, Christopher M. Ott; Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP;
Legal Alert/Article May 22, 2013, previously published on May 20, 2013 “Use” of a trademark or service mark under U.S. trademark law is often misunderstood. Even the best-intended trademark owners encounter unexpected, sometimes fatal, barriers in their attempts to register their marks and maintain their registrations.
| | ALJ Gildea Denies Motions To Strike Testimony In Certain Semiconductor Chips With DRAM Circuitry (337-TA-819)
Lindsay J. Kile, John F. Presper; Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P.;
Legal Alert/Article May 22, 2013, previously published on May 20, 2013 On April 23, 2013, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 18 and Order No. 19 (both dated March 26, 2013) regarding motions to strike certain portions of expert testimony in Certain Semiconductor Chips with DRAM Circuitry, and Modules and Products Containing Same (Inv. No....
| | ITC Decides To Review In Part Remand Initial Determination Finding No Violation of Section 337 in Certain Automated Media Library Devices (337-TA-746)
John F. Presper, Christopher Ricciuti; Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P.;
Legal Alert/Article May 21, 2013, previously published on May 20, 2013 On May 10, 2013, the International Trade Commission (“the Commission”) issued a notice determining to review in part the Remand Initial Determination (“RID”) issued by Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock on March 26, 2013 finding no violation of Section 337 in Certain Automated...
| | ALJ Rogers Grants Motion to Strike Supplemental Interrogatory Response and Denies Motion to Respond Out Of Time in Certain Integrated Circuit Chips (337-TA-859)
Lisa M. Mandrusiak, John F. Presper; Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P.;
Legal Alert/Article May 21, 2013, previously published on May 19, 2013 On May 9, 2013, ALJ Robert K. Rogers, Jr. Issued Order No. 19 granting Respondents LSI Corporation and Seagate Technology’s (collectively, “Respondents”) motion to strike Complainant Realtek Semiconductor Corporation’s (“Realtek”) supplemental interrogatory...
| | ALJ Rogers Denies Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint in Certain Wireless Devices With 3G And/Or 4G Capabilities (337-TA-868)
John F. Presper; Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P.;
Legal Alert/Article May 21, 2013, previously published on May 17, 2013 On May 10, 2013, ALJ Robert K. Rogers, Jr. issued Order No. 27 denying Complainants InterDigital Technology Corporation, IPR Licensing, Inc. and InterDigital Holdings, Inc.’s (collectively, “InterDigital”) motion for leave to amend the complaint in Certain Wireless Devices With 3G...
| | The Supreme Court Affirms Patent Owner's Rights
David B. Cupar; McDonald Hopkins LLC;
Legal Alert/Article May 16, 2013, previously published on May 14, 2013 Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously affirmed that patent exhaustion does not extend to the purchaser of a patented plant who then replicates it but does not pay the patent owner for that replication. Bowman v. Monsanto Co., No. 11-796.
| | ALJ Gildea Denies As Moot Respondents’ Motion To Compel In Certain Wireless Consumer Electronics Devices (337-TA-853)
John F. Presper, Thomas C. Yebernetsky; Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P.;
Legal Alert/Article May 16, 2013, previously published on May 14, 2013 On May 9, 2013, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 38 (dated May 1, 2013) in Certain Wireless Consumer Electronics Devices and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-853).
| | ALJ Gildea Grants-In-Part Respondents’ Motion To Strike In Certain Wireless Consumer Electronics Devices (337-TA-853)
John F. Presper, Thomas C. Yebernetsky; Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P.;
Legal Alert/Article May 16, 2013, previously published on May 14, 2013 On May 9, 2013, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 35 (dated April 30, 2013) in Certain Wireless Consumer Electronics Devices and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-853).
|
|