We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 113

Michael Jordan secures victory in 7th Circuit right of publicity ruling

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 3 2014

On February 19, 2014, the 7th Circuit held that Jewel Foods Store, Inc.'s use of Michael Jordan's name and number in a congratulatory ad that also

Postage stamp of photo depicting Korean War Memorial is not a fair use

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 10 2010

Frank Gaylord sued the US government as the result of the Postal Service's decision to issue a 37-cent stamp depicting a portion of the Korean War Memorial ("Memorial"

Hot-news misappropriation

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 22 2010

On March 18th, the Southern District of New York found that a defendant committed state law "hot-news misappropriation" by rapidly disseminating a plaintiffs' equity research analysis through unauthorized channels

Whirlpool sued by artist over designs for kitchenaid mixers

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 10 2013

Plaintiff Nicole Dinardo designs and sells hand painted KitchenAid Mixers. Whirlpool, which owns KitchenAid, allegedly approached Dinardo regarding

Hearing Components, Inc. v. Shure, Inc

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 6 2010

Not all terms of degree are indefinite; a means-plus-function claim is infringed when the accused device includes a relevant structure that performs the same function in a substantially similar way, resulting in structural equivalency

Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH v Barr Laboratories, Inc

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 2 2010

In a patent infringement suit involving claims directed to the treatment of Parkinson’s disease, the patent at issue was the third in a chain of related divisional patents

Supreme Court again limits which statutes are "jurisdictional" absent a clear indication by Congress or previous Supreme Court authority

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 26 2010

The Supreme Court recently issued another in a series of rulings limiting when a statutory requirement operates as a constraint on the federal courts' jurisdiction

In re Andrew Chapman and David J. King, No. 2009-1270 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 24, 2010)

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 2 2010

An obviousness determination may be called into question if the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences did not appreciate the full scope of a cited prior art reference

In determining patent term extensions under 35 U.S.C. 156, the statutory term “active ingredient” means the product, not the active moiety of the product, that is present in the approved drug

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 18 2010

The patentee owned a patent to a chemical compound MAL hydrochloride (“MAL”), which was patented and received FDA approval to treat precancerous cell growths on the skin