By Ralph A. Dengler and Luis J. Diaz, Gibbons
D'Artagnan Trademarks LLC, ("DT") recently sued the Saul Zaentz Company ("SZ") in the District of New Jersey regarding the trademark ROHAN. In December 2011, DT filed a trademark application for ROHAN in connection with the sale of poultry, namely, duck. The PTO approved the application and SZ opposed its registration when it published for opposition in late March. SZ alleged that it has exclusive rights to certain trademarks (the "Marks") derived from the trilogy of books known as "The Lord of the Rings," by J.R.R. Tolkien. Readers might recall that in the books, "Rohan" is a fictional realm within the fantasy world of the stories. SZ alleges it owns federal trademark registrations for ROHAN, RIDERS OF ROHAN and ROHAN NUTRITION, relating to animal feed and feed supplements for horses, plastic figurines for use with table top hobby battle games, and website services about computer games. SZ has a number of licensees using these marks.
By Ralph A. Dengler and Luis J. Diaz, Gibbons
We have written previously on numerous developments concerning reverse payments in Hatch-Waxman litigation settlements (i.e., payments made by branded pharmaceutical patent holders to generic challengers to postpone market entry of proposed generic products).
By Lisa H. Wang, Gibbons
As we previously discussed, the new inter partes review (IPR) procedures went into effect September 16, 2012, along with several other significant changes.
The production of a party's privileged documents is every lawyer's--and client's--worst nightmare because it provides additional facts (and avenues for discovery) as well as legal analysis of those facts that may not have existed. In layman's terms, it is a game changer. A recent decision plays out this very scenario and shows that despite the production of privileged documents, they can be salvaged if the producing party acted properly before and after the disclosure.
Ben & Jerry's Homemade, Inc. ("Ben & Jerry's"), the Vermont-based ice cream maker, recently filed a lawsuit in SDNY against adult video company Rodax Distributors, Inc. d/b/a Caballero Video, et al ("Defendants"). The complaint alleged trademark and trade dress dilution and infringement, and related claims arising from Defendants' production and distribution of a series of hardcore pornographic DVDs whose titles and packaging play upon the names and trade dress of some of Ben & Jerry's federally registered and famous marks.
By Ralph A. Dengler and Thomas J. Bean, Gibbons
In August, we reported that a decision in the en banc Federal Circuit rehearings of Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., 629 F.3d 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2010) and McKesson Techs. Inc. v. Epic Sys. Corp., 98 U.S.P.Q.2d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 2011) appeared to be imminent. As predicted, on August 31, 2012, the Federal Circuit issued an en banc, per curiam opinion deciding both cases.
Yums v. Nike Update -- Two Amicus Curiae Briefs Filed: One Arguing Vacatur and Remand and the Second in Support of YumsBy Catherine M. Clayton, Gibbons
In a prior blog, we reported that Petitioner Already, LLC d/b/a Yums ("Yums") filed its opening brief with the Supreme Court, arguing that a trademark registrant's post-suit covenant not to sue does not divest a Federal District Court of standing to review a challenge to the validity of the underlying trademark registration.
A pending action in the Eastern District of Wisconsin serves as a reminder of the need for clarity and specificity in any IP-related deal, and in this case, in a matter involving copyright.
Earlier today, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its long-awaited decision in Christian Louboutin S.A. v. Yves Saint Laurent America Holding, Inc. The Appellate Court decision reversed the lower court's finding that a single color can never serve as a trademark for fashion.
We previously reported on developments in various United States Courts of Appeal decisions concerning reverse payments in Hatch-Waxman litigation settlements - that is, payments made by branded pharmaceutical patent holders to generic challengers to postpone market entry of the generic product.
More Articles ...
- Reckitt Benckiser v. Tris Pharma - New Jersey Magistrate Finds No Trade Secret Misappropriation
- Norman IP v. Lexmark: Post AIA Joinder and the Rule 42 Trump Card
- Yums v. Nike -- Yums' Brief Re Jurisdiction and Covenants Not to Sue
- FTC Proposes Rules to Codify Reporting of Exclusive Patent Right Transfers in the Pharmaceutical Industry
- Don't Forget About Those Seven Provisions of the AIA Effective September 16, 2012!
- "Shield Act" Introduced to Thwart NPEs ...
- Wrigley v. Cadbury: Judge Newman Emphasizes Commercial Success and Copying
- (Still) Waiting for Akamai and McKesson ....
- Implementation of USPTO Rules Under the AIA is Underway: Preissuance Submissions
- The Franchise in Panama
- Trade Secrets Update
- Update - Hatch-Waxman Settlements: The FTC Regains Traction After Third Circuit Rules That Reverse Payments Violate Antitrust Law
- National Domestic Policy puts Freedom of Movement in Europe at Risk
- Fighting Fraud in Emerging Economies – Challenges for Overseas Business Operations & Expatriates
- Multiple Government Laws and Regulations Make Data Security Breach Recovery Efforts Complicated in the U.S.
- Disclosure Obligations Highlighted by Two Birds
- The Mabey & Johnson Case – Implications for Shareholders
- Voluntary Pledge to Increase the Quota of Women in Executive Positions Lacks Credibility
- Proposed Further Development of European Company Law
- European Union: Sales Law is Coming
- A standardized European Convention on the Sale of Goods by no means sells itself
- Uniform data protection law planned for the EU
- Threats to Non-U.S. Companies from the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
- Poorly conceived patent applications hinder inventions
- The long path to a standardized European patent