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 651

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


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


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


Surrender Dorothy: Court Upholds Damages, Injunction for Movie Content Infringement
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • January 3 2017

The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed a summary judgment and permanent injunction prohibiting the defendant from licensing images


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


Cancellation petitioner’s burden is to prove that 2(f) registration has not acquired distinctiveness, not that mark is descriptive
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • November 30 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently overruled the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) cancellation of the mark COLD WAR MUSEUM for lack of acquired distinctiveness


Massachusetts attorney’s lien statute applies to patent prosecution costs
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 31 2009

The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts determined, in a case of first impression, that Massachusetts’s attorney’s lien statute permits placing a lien on a patent (and any proceeds later derived from that patent) for legal fees earned while representing a client before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO


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


Partial ownership of a copyright is sufficient to establish standing
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • November 30 2009

Addressing the district court’s dismissal of copyright infringement complaint, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that a partial owner of a copyright has standing to bring an action for copyright infringement


Twenty-one day safe harbor applies to Rule 11- no matter what
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 31 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit confirmed that the service and filing of a motion for sanctions under Rule 11 must occur prior to final judgment or judicial rejection of the offending motion in order to prevail