Opinions Filed in July 2012

Chicago Bldg. Design P.C. v. Mongolian House, Inc.

A claim for copyright infringement must be brought within 3 years of a party receiving notice (actual or inquiry) of a completed claim.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

Dish Network, L.L.C. v. Alejandri

To demonstrate circumvention of access controls, the plaintiff must show: (1) the defendant distributed the technology, and (2) that the technology was designed to circumvent access control systems and has only limited alternative uses.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

Granger v. One Call Lender Services

The award of statutory damages is appropriate in the default judgment context, but a single infringer of a single work is only liable for a single amount regardless of the number of infringement acts.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

In re Antor Media Corporation

Unclaimed disclosures in patents carry a presumption of enablement.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

deVere Group GMBH v. Opinion Corp.

Use of company name and description in web address for an internet consumer review site does not show plausible confusion required for a trademark violation.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

Loughlin v. Ling

If a patent application is entitled to receive the benefit of an earlier effective date under 35 U.S.C. § 120, the earlier date is that application’s filing date for determining whether any of that application's claims offend the one year time restraint in 35 U.S.C. § 135(b)(2).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Midwestern Pet Foods, Inc. v. Societe Des Produits Nestle S.A.

Evidence of fame that postdates an intent-to-use application is relevant to a showing of a likelihood of confusion.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

Sunbeam Products, Inc. v. Chicago American Manufacturing, LLC

A trustee’s rejection of a contract does not abrogate a trademark license.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

General Electric Co. v. ITC

Tariff Act of 1930, § 337, protects domestic industry by prohibiting imports that infringe on U.S. patents.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Fishman Transducers, Inc. v. Paul

When parties are not in direct competition, evidence linking a loss in profits to the trademark infringement is required.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

Back to Top