Opinions Filed in December 2011

A To Z Machining Service, LLC v. National Storm Shelter, LLC

Plaintiff must have a valid copyright registration before filing for copyright infringement; preregistration is not a registered work within the meaning of 17 U.S.C. §411.)

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

Universal Furniture International, Inc. v. Paul Frankel

To be found personally liable for a violation of the Lanham Act plaintiff must show that defendant, themselves, falsely designated the origin of plaintiff’s property.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

Norwood Promotional Products v. Kustomkoozies and Liddle

The continued use of a trademarked image after a failed attempt to terminate a licensing agreement does not constitute trademark infringement.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

The Scooter Store, Inc. v. SpinLife.com

Generic terms have no trademark significance and therefore are not entitled to protection against trademark infringement.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Shelter Capital Partners, LLC

if a provider of web hosting service has no actual knowledge or awareness of copyright infringement and the plaintiff never specifies what content is copyright infringing, the provider will be able to claim safe harbor under statute 512.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

AvidAir Helicopter Supply, Inc. v. Rolls-Royce Corp.

A trade secret does not exist for neither its novelty nor its unavailability, so much as for the reasonable efforts taken in securing the secret's secrecy, and the economic value derived from it.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trade Secrets

Olem Shoe Corp. v. Washington Shoe Co.

If a member of the public is not able to identify the plaintiff’s products with the plaintiff, then even if the defendant creates identical products they would not cause confusion for the public.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals

Conception occurs when the inventor has a specific, settled idea, a particular solution to the problem at hand, but the inventor need not understand precisely why his invention works in order to achieve an actual reduction to practice.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

In Re Construction Equipment Company

Determining either what a reference teaches, or whether a person having ordinary skill in the art would have reason to combine prior art references is a question of fact.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Back to Top