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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 653

The top five intellectual property traps in M&A transactions
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 31 2010

In M&A transactions, many lawyers assume that intellectual property (IP) rights will automatically transfer with the purchase and that IP issues can be cured by general representations and warranties


Teachings incorporated by reference for anticipation purposes need not be individually named
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • September 28 2009

Finding that material not explicitly contained in the single, prior art document may still be considered for purposes of anticipation if incorporated by reference into the document, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a district court’s summary judgment that patents were not invalid for anticipation


License to “make” includes an inherent right to “have made”
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • June 30 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently held that a license to make a patented article includes an inherent right to have a third party make the article absent express language to the contrary


A dismissal for lack of standing should generally be without prejudice
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • July 27 2009

Addressing yet another standing dispute, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned a dismissal for lack of standing with prejudice, noting the general rule that a dismissal on that basis should ordinarily be without prejudice


2017 Intellectual Property Law Year In Review
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • January 31 2017

In a year where politics dominated the headlines, intellectual property law still captured a share of the nation's spotlight. 2016 brought big


“Thin” copyright for arrangement and coordination of common architectural elements won't cut it
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • January 30 2009

Addressing for issue of similarity of copyrighted architectural plans, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that no reasonable observer could find that two plans in dispute were substantially similar


Two-way test for obviousness type double patenting narrowly applied
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • June 30 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that the two-way test for obviousness-type double patenting is applicable when the claims could have been presented in an earlier application in the family


Adidas wins US case against two and four stripe
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • September 10 2008

Less than a month after the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling in Adidas v Marca Mode 2008 C-10207, Adidas has won a U.S.$305 million payout in the United States from Collective Brands in a lawsuit seven years in the making


State Law Cannot Blur the Line Between Patents and Copyrights
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • February 27 2017

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit determined that a plaintiff could not use a state law claim for unfair competition to protect a valve


Narrow claim construction goes down the drain
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • February 29 2008

Reversing a summary judgment of non-infringement based on a claim construction that excluded a disclosed embodiment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, finding no disclaimer or estoppel during prosecution, vacated the district court claim construction and remanded the case