Category Archives: Intellectual Property

Genetic Veterinary Sciences, Inc. v. LABOklin GmbH (E.D. Va. 2018)

By Donald Zuhn — Earlier this month, in Genetic Veterinary Sciences, Inc. v. LABOklin GmbH, Senior District Judge Henry Coke Morgan, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia granted a motion for judgment as a matter of law under Rule 50 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure filed by Plaintiff Genetic Veterinary Sciences, Inc. (doing business as Paw Prints Genetics) that claims 1-3 of U.S. Patent No. 9,157,114, which is assigned to Defendant University of Bern, are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Genetic Veterinary Sciences ("GVS") had initiated the dispute between the parties….. To continue reading this legal news please click Read full information...

Posted in Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

EPA boots reporters from meeting on chemicals called a PR disaster

Enlarge / US EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. (credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr) Scott Pruitt's tenure as head of the US' Environmental Protection Agency has often been bogged down in scandals involving questionable spending and the unjustifiable rollback of regulations. But the latest controversy is one the agency's own making. This morning, Pruitt was speaking at a workshop convened to discuss the handling of specific chemical contaminants that have been found in water supplies. The EPA was already under fire for what appeared to be an attempt to stall a report that suggests these chemicals were more toxic than previously thought, so the workshop provided an opportunity to show that the agency took the risks seriously. Instead, the EPA started a brand-new controversy by specifically excluding CNN and the AP from Pruitt's speech and by having security physically escort a reporter out of the building. Contamination The controversy focuses on a large class of….. To continue reading this legal news please click Read full information...

Posted in Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Layers of Doctrine with a Faulty Claim Construction at the Core

by Dennis Crouch D Three Enterprises v. SunModo Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2018) Reading this decision feels akin to slowly peeling off the layers of an onion – hoping to reach some prize at the core but only reaching a rotten core. D-Three’s patents in suit are directed to roof-mount sealing assemblies for solar panel installation.  U.S. Patent Nos. 8,689,517; 9,068,339; and 8,707,655.   The district court found the asserted claims invalid as obvious or anticipated.  The basic central dispute, however, was whether the claims could rely upon a 2009 provisional application filing date.  Although the formalities of the priority chain was met — the district court found a substantive problem. In particular, the court ruled that the 2009 provisional did not sufficiently disclose the inventions as claimed — i.e., failure of written description.  Going one layer deeper, it seems that the real dispute is about claim construction —….. To continue reading this legal news please click Read full information...

Posted in Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Digital Resurrections Necessitate Federal Post-Mortem Publicity Rights

Digital Resurrections Necessitate Federal Post-Mortem Publicity RightsMeaghan FonteinIn the 1966 horror film Island of Terror, actor Peter Cushing’s character faced a predicament of dealing with computer-borne life forms resembling virtual humans. Fast-forward: 22 years after his death and 50 years after Island of Terror, Peter Cushing himself is resurrected as a virtual human to reprise his Grand Moff Tarkin character in Star Wars: Rogue One. While Cushing’s digital resurrection was seen as brilliant innovation by some, the performance upset many others-including his heir-who felt emotionally damaged from seeing a deceased person’s image repurposed for profit. Moral dilemmas, however, are merely secondary to the true threat of harm posed by digital resurrections: misappropriation for commercial gain. By definition, to misappropriate means “to put to the wrong use.” Reaching beyond the deceased artist’s control to digitally resurrect their….. To continue reading this legal news please click Read full information...

Posted in Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Respecting Foreign Judgments and $79 million for clicking “I agree”

by Dennis Crouch An interesting new petition before the Supreme Court focuses on international licensing and copyright issues.  What happens when foreign courts give less weight to contracts and copyrights than would a US court? World Programming Ltd. v. SAS Institute, Supreme Court Docket No. 17-1459 (2018). [petition][docket] Agreeing not to Reverse Engineer, then Reverse Engineering: WPL, a UK software company purchased a copy of SAS’s popular software and began to study its functionality (all in the UK).  As part of the process, WPL clicked “I agree” on the SAS clickwrap licenses. Those licenses included a prohibition on reverse engineering and also limited the software use to “non-production purposes.”  According to the petition, however, “under U.K. and E.U. law, such observation and study is lawful, and contractual terms restricting such acts are null and void. . . .While  WPL was required to agree to that….. To continue reading this legal news please click Read full information...

Posted in Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment