Solicitor General Weighs in on Section 101, Prompts High Court to Grant Review in Athena Diagnostics v. Mayo Collaborative Services

By Andy Halaby At the Supreme Court’s request, the Solicitor General on Friday, December 6, weighed in on two pending cert petitions dealing with patent subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101.  Though the Solicitor General urged on behalf the United States that both those cert petitions be denied, he seized the opportunity, in both briefs, to maintain that the Supreme Court should accept review in yet another case, Athena Diagnostics v. Mayo Collaborative Services, and use that opportunity to straighten out what the Solicitor General maintains is a recent, deviant strain of Court decisions interpreting § 101. In   Read More »

Posted in IP and Technology Litigation, Patent Litigation | Tagged , ,

Share this Article:

Google v. Oracle Heads to the Supreme Court

By Andy Halaby The Supreme Court’s cert grant on the Federal Circuit’s most recent decision in the long-running and highly publicized battle between Oracle and Google appears to confront policy questions as much as legal ones — such as whether the nation’s economy would be better or worse off, and under what circumstances, allowing software developers to copy others’ application programming interfaces without paying for them.  That the Court granted cert, notwithstanding the Solicitor General’s urging it not too, suggests the Court may be prepared to tackle those questions. Google’s petition challenges the Federal Circuit’s determinations that •  certain of   Read More »

Posted in Copyright Litigation, IP and Technology Litigation | Tagged ,

Share this Article:

The Truth Is in the Syrup: Bud Light Ordered to Remove ‘No Corn Syrup’ from Packaging in False Advertising Battle

By Shalayne Pillar and David G. Barker The U.S. District Court, District of Wisconsin, recently ordered Anheuser-Busch to stop using the label “No Corn Syrup” on its packaging, the latest ruling in a false advertising battle filed over Anheuser-Busch’s attack ads aimed at rival MillerCoors. The case involves Anheuser-Busch’s Bud Light ad campaign that highlighted MillerCoors’s use of corn syrup in brewing Coors Light and Miller Lite.  Anheuser-Busch’s claims are (technically) true: MillerCoors does use corn syrup as a “fermentation aid” during the brewing process, while Bud Light does not.  Nevertheless, MillerCoors sued Anheuser-Busch for false advertising, claiming the ads   Read More »

Posted in False Advertising, IP and Technology Litigation | Tagged , , , ,

Share this Article:

Republishing DNC’s Stolen Secrets Not Trade Secret Misappropriation

By David G. Barker On April 20, 2018, the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) sued the Russian Federation, Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. (the “Campaign”), WikiLeaks, and other defendants relating to the Russian Federation’s theft of documents from the DNC during the 2016 presidential election. Last week, the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, dismissed with prejudice the complaint against the Campaign, WikiLeaks, and the other defendants. The court noted, the “primary wrongdoer in this alleged criminal enterprise is undoubtably the Russian Federation . . . cannot be sued in the courts of the United States for   Read More »

Posted in IP and Technology Litigation, Trade Secrets Litigation | Tagged ,

Share this Article:

Supreme Court to Decide Two Trademark Cases

By Shalayne Pillar and David G. Barker The Supreme Court of the United States recently granted certiorari in two trademark cases.  In Romag Fasteners v. Fossil, the Court will consider whether courts can order trademark infringers to disgorge their profits without a finding of “willful” infringement. In Lucky Brand Dungarees v. Marcel Fashion Group, the Court will consider whether claim preclusion may bar a defendant from raising a defense late in litigation. In Romag Fasteners, a jury found that Fossil infringed Romag’s trademarks.  Nevertheless, the district court refused to award $6.8 million of Fossil’s profits because Romag could not prove   Read More »

Posted in IP and Technology Litigation, Trademark Litigation | Tagged , , , ,

Share this Article: