Patent & IP news for June 8, 2013

The Sunitinib Saga continues: Third time’s the charm? from spicyipindia.blogspot.com

The IPAB has set aside the revocation of Sunitinib patent due to procedural lapses again!!(IPAB order can be accessed here). As Sunny Deol would drawl “tariq pe tariq, tariq pe tariq...” (movie buffs ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Trademark Opposition to “[]” Dismissed from www.lotempiolaw.com

The Australian company Casella Wines, the winemaker of the popular wine Yellowtail® filed a trademark application for []. Yes that’s what they did, they applied for the trademark registration for just “the brackets.” If you ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Stricter COPPA Rules Go Into Effect July 2013 from www.ipwatchdog.com

The 1998 Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), which provides a number of rules and regulations with respect to children's online privacy, recently got an overhaul. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) amended COPPA ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Samsung sides with 'patent troll' InterDigital against Nokia, Huawei and ZTE on case schedule from www.fosspatents.com

Samsung is the primary target of the patent infringement complaints filed by InterDigital, a non-practicing entity monetizing cellular standard-essential patents (SEPs), at the beginning of this year with the ITC and the United States District ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Apple says Samsung keeps launching devices with features the court found likely to infringe patents from www.fosspatents.com

Samsung has just won an import ban from the Washington, DC-based United States International Trade Commission (USITC, or just ITC) against older iPhones and iPads (CNN Opinion op-ed, blog post on decision, blog post on ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook

Judge Bryson on “the present invention” from www.717madisonplace.com

It would be interesting to see a plot of the rise and fall of use of the term “the present invention” in patent applications.  With cases like Scimed v. Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, 242 F.3d ...

Share via E–mail | Twitter | Facebook