Pamela Chestek
-
Standing or Not? Answer
Here is the answer to yesterday’s post: The court held that Balsam was the owner of the patent and therefore had standing to bring suit. Although San Marco was the owner of the patent in 2005, the court found that the 2006 agreement evidenced intent that Balsam immediately possess title to the patent and hold… Continue reading
-
Standing or Not? Answer Tomorrow
Here are the facts, you decide who owns the patent. Court’s decision this time tomorrow. The original owner of the patent was Balsam Coffee Solutions, Inc. On June 9, 2005, Balsam assigned the patent to San Marco Roasters, Inc. The two inventors on the patent were co-owners of both companies. More than a year later,… Continue reading
-
Logo Designer Loses (And Should Have)
In FSC Franchise Co. v. Express Corporate Apparel, LLC, a printing company designed the logo for a restaurant and manufactured and sold promotional goods for the restaurant. The parties had a falling out, the restaurant sued for infringement, and the logo designer counterclaimed for infringement too. Express Corporate Apparel made the branded apparel for plaintiff’s… Continue reading
-
Pushing a Deal
Movie deals are made at the Sundance Film Festival, and they’re made fast. Weinstein Company v. Smokewood Entertainment Group gives us some of the flavor. The film was “Push,” now renamed “Precious.” (One blog suggests that it was done to avoid confusion with a cheesy sci-fi film of the same name.) Push won the Grand… Continue reading
-
Who Owns “Tavern On the Green”?
The New York Times is reporting that New York City has reversed its original opinion about whether it or the soon-to-be-ousted lessee of the building owns the trademark “Tavern on the Green.” According to the article (registration required), when the City originally put the lease out for bids it said that it could not convey… Continue reading
-
Recording It Doesn’t Make It So
I’ve read so many standing cases that it takes something different for me to pay much attention. This is one. Donald W. Huntley, Esq. is a patent lawyer and plaintiff Huntley, L.L.C., also known as Huntley & Associates, his firm. (His web site is www.monopolize.com, unfortunately not live right now.) EPL Technologies, Inc. retained Mr.… Continue reading
-
The Price of a Re-org
Some decisions just make me nervous. The Sixth Circuit decision in Cincom Systems, Inc. v. Novelis Corp. is one of them. Cincom Systems licenses software. In 1989 it licensed software to Alcan Rolled Products Division (Alcan Ohio), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Alcan, Inc. The license was for use of the software on one computer in… Continue reading
-
Not So Fast
A little while ago I blogged on Gerber Scientific International, Inc. v. Satisloh AG, a case that decided whether a later-filed continuation-in-part was included in the assignment of a grandparent application. The 271 Patent Blog is reporting that the issue was certified for interlocutory appeal to the Federal Circuit. © 2009 Pamela Chestek Continue reading
-
A Registrant, Its Assigns – and Exclusive Licensee
Section 32 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114, provides a cause of action for a “registrant” of a trademark. Section 45, 15 U.S.C. § 1127, defines a “registrant” as including “legal representatives, predecessors, successors and assigns.” So one only has a cause of action under Section 32 if one is the registrant or… Continue reading
-
What Every Transactional Counsel Should Know
Intellectual property specialists may not be involved in the preparation of merger and acquisition documents, and a couple of recent cases show what can go wrong when the form is missing something important. In one case the patentee won, but in the other the patentee didn’t. In Carotek, Inc. v. Kobayashi Ventures, LLC, the missing… Continue reading
About Me
Learn more about me at my website, Chestek Legal
Recent Posts
Categories
- copyright
- domain name
- moral rights
- patent
- right of publicity
- social media
- trade dress
- trade libel
- trade secret
- trademark
- Uncategorized