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 114

America Invents Act: micro entity status for institutions of higher education

  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 10 2012

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) has created a new class of patent applicants designated as “micro entities” who are entitled to a 75 percent reduction in certain fees paid to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Changes to U.S. design patent law will extend term of design patents, provide international filing options

  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 11 2012

On December 5, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Patent Law Treaties Implementation Act, which will implement several significant changes to U.S. design patent law when approved by President Obama

Judge Robinson grants in part plaintiff's motion to preclude defendant from adducing improper damages testimony from expert

  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 5 2011

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Sue L. Robinson in SRI International, Inc. v. Internet Security Systems, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 04-1199-SLR (D.Del., October 31, 2011), the Court granted in part plaintiff SRI International’s motion to preclude improper damages testimony by defendant Symantec Corporation’s expert during the damages trial

Magistrate Judge Burke recommends that defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss be granted in part

  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 4 2011

By Report and Recommendation entered by The Honorable Christopher J. Burke in Eastman Chemical Co. v. Alphapet Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 09-971-LPS-CJB (D.Del., November 10, 2011), the Court granted in part defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the breach of contract and trade secret misappropriation claims asserted by Plaintiff

Judge Stark denies plaintiff's requests for reconsideration or reargument of motion for summary judgment of non-infringement

  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 21 2012

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Cooper Notification, Inc. v. Twitter, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 09-685-LPS (D.Del., July 16, 2012), the Court denied the requests of Plaintiff Cooper Notification, Inc. for reconsideration or reargument, leave to file supplemental infringement reports, and clarification of the Court's claim construction in connection with the Court's prior Opinion and Order (D.I. 568 and 569) granting defendants' motions for summary judgment of non-infringement

No presumption of irreparable harm in false advertising cases either

  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 5 2011

Irreparable injury cannot be presumed in Lanham Act false advertising cases

New USPTO guidance discusses patent-eligibility of inventions involving laws of nature

  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 5 2012

A new USPTO guidance memorandum describes how the USPTO will review patent-eligibility of process claims for biotechnology inventions in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Mayo v. Prometheus

Chief Judge Sleet adopts Magistrate Judge Thynge's recommendation to deny defendants' motion to stay patent infringement action pending reexamination by the PTO

  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 17 2012

By Memorandum Opinion entered by Chief Judge Gregory M. Sleet in Imagevision.net, Inc. v. Internet Payment Exchange, Inc., Civil Action No. 12-054-GMS-MPT, the Court adopted the ultimate recommendation of Magistrate Judge Mary Pat Thynge and denied the motion of defendant, Internet Payment Exchange, Inc. (“IPX”), requesting a stay pending the conclusion of the inter partes reexamination of the patent-in-suit by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the “PTO”

Amendment to add new defendants denied after close of fact discovery: DNJ

  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 18 2013

A plaintiff's request to add 12 new defendants to a patent infringement action after the close of fact discovery would cause undue delay, is

Judge Stark renders court's Markman rulings in patent infringement action filed against amusement park operators

  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 4 2012

By Memorandum Opinion entered by the Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Magnetar Technologies Corp., et al. v. Six Flag Theme Parks Inc., et al., Civil Action 07-127-LPS-MPT (D.Del., February 1, 2012), the Court issued its Markman construction of the five claim terms andor phrases as used in U.S. Patent Numbers 5,277,125 (“the ‘125 patent”) and 6,659,237 (”the ‘237 patent”) that were in dispute