Click to View the Digital Edition of this Supplement

A Look at Inter Partes Review in Its First Year
The Legal Intelligencer
October 8, 2013

Implemented on September 16, 2012, by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, inter partes review is a new proceeding that permits a party to challenge the validity of a patent on the basis of prior art patents or printed publications. At the time of its introduction, there was uncertainty about how frequently IPR would be used, how successful petitioners would be in having their petitions instituted, and the intricacies of discovery, claim construction, trials and estoppel provisions. Now, a year later, we have learned a great deal, but many questions remain. Full Text


Using IP to Shift the Power Balance in a Transaction
The Legal Intelligencer
October 8, 2013

The bargained-for exchange of intellectual property rights forms the foundation of value in many corporate transactions. However, it is often the case that purchasers and sellers do not fully appreciate the scope of rights that are to be transferred between the parties. These misunderstandings can lead to increases or decreases in bargaining power. Full Text


Toil and Trouble for Patent Trolls, Whoever They Are
The Legal Intelligencer
October 8, 2013

The long-anticipated Government Accountability Office report on rising patent litigation and the role of nonpracticing entities was published in August to relatively muted response from corporate America and legislative bodies. Rhetoric lobbed from both ends has long defined the public discussion on NPEs, or “patent trolls,” as they are more commonly known. The conversation seems poised to change based on the GAO’s data and conclusion, though, which revealed contradictions regarding the NPE effect. Full Text


Court-Appointed Special Masters in Federal Patent Cases
The Legal Intelligencer
October 8, 2013

Across the nation, an increased number of patent cases are requiring a larger and larger portion of the courts’ time, creating a backlog of cases. Full Text


Fair Use of Athletes’ Names and Likenesses in Video Games
The Legal Intelligencer
October 8, 2013

A spate of recent decisions highlights the intersection of different forms of intellectual property rights when the names, likenesses and records of athletes are approved without the athletes’ consent for video games and like entertainment properties that are not factual renditions or actual representations of what transpired in any actual competition. Full Text


Presidential Disapproval of the ITC’s Apple-Samsung Order
The Legal Intelligencer
October 8, 2013

As has been widely reported in the press, in the ongoing battle between Apple and Samsung, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, acting on behalf of the president, engaged in a policy evaluation of the June 4 orders issued by the U.S. International Trade Commission that would have prohibited Apple Inc. from importing and selling certain of Apple’s iPhone and iPad devices in the United States. This evaluation is required by Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. As a result of the evaluation, on August 3, the USTR disapproved the exclusion and cease-and-desist orders in In the Matter of Certain Electronic Devices, Including Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices, and Tablet Computers, Investigation No. 337-TA-794. Full Text



Is Trade Secret Definition an Active Litigation Matter?
The Legal Intelligencer
October 8, 2013

“Sir, please sir! Put down the trade secret, take two steps back and put your hands where I can see them.” Full Text


ONLINE ONLY

VIDEO

Patents, Obama and the ITC

The Obama Administration’s recent veto of an International Trade Commission ruling that would have banned the import of some models of the iPhone and iPad has left patent holders with many questions. In this video, lawyers from Volpe and Koenig examine the impact of the veto on patent holders.

10-Year Anniversary of Madrid Protocol

This year marks the 10th anniversary of the Madrid Protocol, which makes it easier for trademark holders in the United States to protect their brands in multiple countries overseas. In this video, John P. Sullivan of Volpe & Koenig examines the importance of this agreement.