Partner Maria Anderson and Associates Kim Kennedy and Alex Martinez co-authored, “Strategies for Obtaining Patents on AI Inventions in the U.S. and Europe,” which was published on the insideBIGDATA website….
PTAB May Invalidate Claims on Reconsideration Based on Grounds Raised in the Institution Decision that Were Not Originally Instituted In AC Technologies S.A., V. Amazon.Com, Inc., Blizzard Entertainment, Inc., Appeal…
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, March 4, 2019, held in a 9-0 decision that the term “full costs” in § 505 of the Copyright Act is limited by the general “costs” statute (28 U.S.C. §§ 1821 and 1920). For example, § 505 does not allow courts to shift expenses such as expert witness fees, e-discovery fees, or jury consulting fees. The case, Rimini Street, Inc. v. Oracle USA, Inc, now returns to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for further proceedings.
On Monday, March 4, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a unanimous decision that, under § 411(a) of the Copyright Act, a claimant may not bring suit for copyright infringement until the Copyright Office has either granted or refused the copyright claimant’s application for registration. Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com, LLC. The Court’s decision affirmed the dismissal of a copyright suit on the grounds that the plaintiff did not comply with § 411(a) prior to filing the suit.
Knobbe Martens is pleased to share the news that the firm will be honored as a “Community Partner” at the upcoming Irvine Valley College (IVC) Foundation Awards Dinner. The award,…
Associate Tom Cowan presented “Patent Basics for the Aerospace Industry,” at the Space Foundation Space Commerce Workshop at the Aerospace Corporation in El Segundo, California. As the keynote speaker for the event, Tom…
For the ninth consecutive year, Knobbe Martens has been ranked as one of the top trademark law firms in the nation by the World Trademark Review (WTR) in the “WTR 1000” guide.
A Post-URAA Patent that Issues After but Expires Before a Related Pre-URAA Patent Is Not a Double-Patenting Reference Against the Pre-URAA Patent In Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Breckenridge Pharmaceutical Inc.,…
The firm is pleased to recognize eighteen attorneys who are included in the 2019 Southern California “Super Lawyers” list. The attorneys selected for this prestigious recognition are among the top five percent of attorneys in a region and are vetted through a rigorous process that includes peer nominations, third-party validations, and independent research of the candidates’ professional accomplishments.
On Tuesday, January 22, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a unanimous decision that, even where the details of the invention are kept confidential, a commercial sale may place the invention “on sale” under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”). Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.