SCOTUS: “Full Costs” Are Just Costs

By Mark Webb and David G. Barker Today, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Rimini Street v. Oracle USA that  “full costs” described in 17 U.S.C. § 505 of the (Copyright Act) are limited to the six categories of taxable costs set forth in 28 U.S.C.  §§ 1821, 1920. The decision reversed the district court’s award of, and the Ninth Circuit’s order affirming, $12,774,550.26 in additional costs to Oracle for litigation costs outside of those delineated in §§ 1821 and 1920, such as expert witnesses, e-discovery, and jury consulting. The Court determined, absent an explicit statutory instruction, a   Read More »

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

Share this Article:

Ninth Circuit Refuses to Vacate Lower Court’s Ruling After Settlement During Appeal

By Rachael Peters Pugel and David G. Barker On Tuesday, the Ninth Circuit declined to vacate a district court’s ruling at the request of the parties after they reached a settlement of their trademark dispute. In Reserve Media, Inc. v. Efficient Frontiers, Inc., Efficient Frontiers alleged that Reserve Media, a restaurant technology startup, infringed its trademarks.  After the parties failed to resolve their dispute, Reserve Media filed a complaint seeking a declaratory judgment of noninfringement.  Efficient Frontiers responded with a counterclaim for trademark infringement and unfair competition. The Central District of California granted Reserve Media’s motions for summary judgment, holding   Read More »

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

Share this Article:

Webcast Title Using Trademarks of Another Deemed Nominative Fair Use

By Robert A. Clarke and David G. Barker The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that the title of a webcast, which included two trademarks belonging to another party, constituted nominative fair use, which protected the defendants from trademark infringement claims. The plaintiff in Applied Underwriters v. Lichtenegger offers workers’ compensation insurance to employers through its EquityComp program.  Applied Underwriters owns federally registered trademarks for “Applied Underwriters” and “EquityComp.”  Defendants published a webcast critiquing EquityComp’s services, entitled “Applied Underwriters’ EquityComp® Program: Like it, Leave it, or Let it be?”  Applied Underwriters sued defendants for trademark infringement for including the   Read More »

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

Share this Article:

Helsinn Healthcare v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA: Textualism Runs Aground

By Andrew F. Halaby Affirming the Federal Circuit, the Supreme Court on January 22 held that post-AIA section 102(a)(1)’s provision, A person shall be entitled to a patent unless . . . the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, (emphasis added), does not require that the invention “on sale” be “available to the public.” To be sure, the “on sale” bar historically has not required public availability, at least according to the Federal Circuit. (As the   Read More »

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

Share this Article:

How Scandalous! SCOTUS Again Takes up Whether the Lanham Act Violates the First Amendment

By Shalayne Pillar and David G. Barker On Friday, the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear a case that will decide whether the federal ban on trademark protection for “scandalous” material is unconstitutional.  In re Brunetti follows the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (“USPTO’s”) denial of trademark registration for the word “Fuct,” which held that the mark “comprises immoral . . . or scandalous matter” and thus could not be registered under Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act.  On appeal, the Federal Circuit sided with the applicant (discussed here), holding the statute violated the Free Speech provision   Read More »

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

Share this Article: