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 135

Advertising Law Snapshots, Volume 1, Issue 8
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • April 19 2016

Defendants published viral video featuring plaintiff's mattresses but plaintiff's name was not used Character in video falls back on mattress "in a


Halo Creative & Design v. Comptoir Des Indes Inc
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • April 18 2016

The plaintiff, a Hong Kong corporation, sued the defendant, a Canadian corporation, in the Northern District of Illinois for infringement of


A broader independent claim cannot be nonobvious where a dependent claim stemming from that independent claim is invalid for obviousness
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • March 9 2010

Following a five-day trial, the jury returned a special verdict that defendant willfully infringed claims of a patent relating to a cooling device designed to mount within the drive bay of a computer, that certain independent claims were not invalid as obvious, but that certain dependent claims were obvious


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


A courts inherent power to award attorney's fees should be reserved for cases in which the conduct of the party or an attorney is egregious and no other basis for sanctions exists
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • May 5 2010

Following a jurys finding of infringement, the district court granted defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law (“JMOL”) on non-infringement and granted defendants' petition seeking attorneys fees and expenses


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


I4I Ltd. Partnership & Infrastructures For Info. Inc., v. Microsoft Corp
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • March 16 2010

The test for willfulness is distinct and separate from the factors guiding a district court's discretion regarding whether and by how much to enhance damages in light of a willfulness finding


Richardson v. Stanley Works, Inc
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • March 16 2010

The scope of a design patent claim must be construed to identify the ornamental and functional aspects of the design, and applying the ordinary observer test, the trier of fact must determine whether the deception that arises is a result of the similarities in the overall design, not of similarities in ornamental features in isolation


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


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