News & Publications

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board designated a decision as precedential and three as informative.

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on June 5, 2020, affirmed a lower court ruling which held that Quanta Storage Inc., a Taiwanese disk drive maker, must turn over to HP Inc. all of the cash, factories and patents necessary to satisfy a $439 million antitrust judgment from 2019.

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on June 4, 2020, held that A.I.G. Agency Inc.’s trademark claims against AIG, the multinational finance and insurance company, were time-barred because it knew of AIG’s use of the mark decades before suing.

The First Circuit affirmed a district court judgment that prevented pharmaceutical company Novo Nordisk Inc. from enforcing a confidentiality and noncompete agreement that it had entered into with a worker who was briefly laid off and rehired before leaving the company for BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc.

Register to attend the latest in a series of USPTO webinars focused on intellectual property (IP) protection and enforcement in China.

The continued inequitable treatment of African-Americans and other communities of color is intolerable. We must reflect on how our actions demonstrate a commitment to diversity, equality, and inclusion through discussion, education, and implementation. And we must all find ways to come together, and no longer be torn apart.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on June 3, 2020, launched the COVID-19 Response Resource Center to provide stakeholders and other interested parties with improved access to USPTO initiatives, programs, and other helpful intellectual property (IP)-related information regarding the COVID-19 outbreak.

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on May 29, 2020, refused to alter a mixed ruling on the validity of Boston Scientific’s spinal stimulation patent.

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on May 17, 2020, affirmed Jim Beam Brand Co’s (Jim Beam) win against a company that accused it of infringing trademarks because the marks in question were dissimilar and customer confusion wasn’t likely.

The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on May 20, 2020, vacated and remanded a Florida court ruling that found that a group of website operators who hacked into a competitor’s server and database didn’t infringe its source code copyright or misappropriate its proprietary information.