Remove companies applied-materials-inc
article thumbnail

Trade Secrets Claim Against Company Not Severable From Claim Against Employee, Appeals Court Finds

JD Supra Law

A California semiconductor manufacturer cannot pursue in court its claims of trade secret misappropriation against a rival company while simultaneously arbitrating the same claims against the allegedly larcenous employee, a state appeals court recently found. In Mattson Technology, Inc. Applied Materials, Inc.,

article thumbnail

Federal Circuit Affirms Skinny Label Carve Outs

Intellectual Property Law Blog

2022-1194, 2022-1208, and 2022-1246 (December 7, 2023) , the Federal Circuit held that generic pharmaceutical companies may continue to use skinny labels to avoid infringement of method of treatment claims as long as they do not engage in advertising or promotional activities that encourage infringement of the patents. Lundbeck A/S, et al.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Federal Circuit Narrows Scope of Egyptian Goddess

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch The Federal Circuit recently vacated a jury verdict of non-infringement in the long-running design patent dispute between outdoor apparel companies Columbia Sportswear and Seirus Innovative Accessories. Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc. , Gear, Inc. Swisa, Inc. ,

article thumbnail

sending emails under former employees' names may be reverse passing off

43(B)log

Hossain’s employer was material to those contacts, as it was important to the decision by customers to apply for a loan or by referral sources to refer a borrower” and that loanDepot was attempting to “influence a consumer to apply for a loan at loanDepot, or for a referral source to refer a borrower to apply for a loan at loanDepot.”

article thumbnail

Only Some of the Claims are Invalid

Patently-O

[W]e agree that the operative complaint asserted infringement of only claims 1 and 31–33 of each asserted patent, and because Sage did not file any counterclaim of its own (instead, it simply moved to dismiss Hantz’s complaint), we conclude that the ineligibility judgment should apply to only claims 1 and 31–33 of the asserted patents.

article thumbnail

Twitter Narrows, But Doesn’t Completely Avoid, a Dangerous Copyright Lawsuit–Concord Music v. X

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

or the ultimate consumer of the infringing material. argues that the X/Twitter users who selected the copyright-protected material, obtained it, composed the underlying tweets, and chose to post those tweets were the ones doing the transmitting.” That’s a pretty fundamental factual distinction.

Music 77
article thumbnail

3 Count: Can’t Help Appealing

Plagiarism Today

The Second Circuit has now upheld that dismissal, ruling that the right of copyright termination only applies to agreements reached by the original author. They were sued by Super Duper Inc., a company that publishes similar material, alleging Super Duper content was available on the PresenceLearning platform without permission.

Licensing 185