Opinions Filed in February 2013

PC Puerto Rico LLC. v. El Smaili

Injunctive relief was appropriate when gas stations stopped selling gas but continued to display the Texaco mark.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

Yellowbook, Inc. v. Brandeberry

If a trademark is owned in both a personal and corporate capacity, sale of the corporate interest in the mark does not mean it can be used in business by the seller.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

Building Graphics, Inc. v. Lennar Corp.

In the absence of direct evidence of a violation, the circumstantial evidence must demonstrate a reasonable possibility of access to the copyrighted work.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

Rucker v. Harlequin Enterprises, LTD

Copyright violations will not be found when the only similarities between competing romance novels are generic tropes and character traits commonly used in the industry.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

West Plains, L.L.C. v. Retzlaff Grain Co.

Compilations of information may qualify for trade secret protection even if the information is publicly available.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trade Secrets

Interactive Fitness Holdings, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc.

When a patent differs from prior art by only a single limitation, the patent is invalid by anticipation if that limitation is covered by other prior art.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Multi Time Mach., v. Amazon.com

To prove trademark infringement, a plaintiff must establish that the defendant’s website uses the plaintiff’s mark confusingly when a consumer searches the defendant’s website.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

Engenium Solutions v. Symphonic Techs.

In a claim of literal infringement of software a court uses a filtration-comparison analysis rather than the abstraction-filtration-comparison test used in non-literal software copyright claims.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

Cephalon, Inc. v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Enablement can be found when one skilled in the art can practice the invention without “undue experimentation.”

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Hallford v. Fox Entertainment Group, Inc.

In order to determine substantial similarity between a television show and a screenplay the court compares the stories' plot and sequence, characters, themes, setting and pace, and total concept and feel.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

Image Online Design, Inc. v. Internet Corp. for Assigned Names & Numbers

Stated intention to license the use of a service mark is too speculative to form the basis of an infringement action.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc.

The disclosure of an algorithm for a similar, but different, structure from which a person skilled in the art could derive the undisclosed algorithm is not adequate disclosure, and the limitation containing the undisclosed algorithm is therefore invalid for indefiniteness.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Skyline Zipline Global, LLC v. Domeck

A device that is the antithesis of a patented product does not infringe the original patent.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Bridgetree, Inc. v. Red F Marketing LLC

Making employees available for deposition, providing discovery for the alleged trade secret in question, and providing expert testimony are sufficient steps to identify alleged trade secrets.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trade Secrets

CleanCut, LLC v. Rug Doctor, Inc.

Objective willfulness exists where the patentee shows that “the infringer acted despite an objectively high likelihood that its actions constituted infringement of a valid patent.”

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

U.S. v. Howley

Taking reasonable steps to protect trade secrets includes a "no photography" policy and guards surrounding the building.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trade Secrets

Back to Top