Print Page
S&H IP Blog
On January 4, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Iancu v. Brunetti. On appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”), the Supreme Court will answer the question of whether § 2(a) of the Lanham Trademark Act (“§ 2(a)”), which prohibits the federal registration of “immoral” or “scandalous” trademarks (“scandalous provsion”), is a violation of the First Amendment”™s free speech clause.
March 14, 2019 | By S&H
Posted in: S&H IP Blog | U.S. Supreme Court
Posted in: S&H IP Blog | U.S. Supreme Court
Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC
On October 26, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to review Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC. The question before the Supreme Court is whether, under 11 U.S.C. § 365 (“§ 365”) of the Bankruptcy Code, a debtor”™s rejection of a license agreement terminates the obligations of the agreement, including the loss of a trademark license.
December 13, 2018 | By S&H
Posted in: S&H IP Blog | U.S. Supreme Court
Posted in: S&H IP Blog | U.S. Supreme Court
Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.
On June 25, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court (“Supreme Court”) granted certiorari in Helsinn Healthcare S.A., v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. The question before the Supreme Court is whether, under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”), an inventor”™s sale of an invention to a third party qualifies as prior art when the claimed invention was not publicly disclosed before one year of its application filing date.
December 13, 2018 | By S&H
Posted in: S&H IP Blog | U.S. Supreme Court
Posted in: S&H IP Blog | U.S. Supreme Court
Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com
On June 28, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court (“Supreme Court”) granted certiorari to Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com. The question before the Supreme Court is whether, under 17 U.S.C. § 411(a) of the Copyright Act, a copyright owner can bring an infringement suit after delivering the proper deposit, application, and fee to the U.S. Copyright Office (“Copyright Office”), but before the Register of Copyrights has acted on the application for registration.
December 13, 2018 | By S&H
Posted in: S&H IP Blog | U.S. Court of Appeals For The Federal Circuit
Posted in: S&H IP Blog | U.S. Court of Appeals For The Federal Circuit
BSG Tech LLC v. BuySeasons, Inc.
On August 15, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) issued a decision in BSG Tech LLC v. BuySeasons, Inc., holding that when an unconventional feature of the patent claim is determined to be an abstract idea, that unconventional feature cannot make the patent claim eligible under 35 U.S.C §101 (“§ 101”).