Related News:
Neutral Tandem, McDermott, Nike, Google, Simmons: Intellectual Property
Neutral Tandem Inc., a Chicago company that provides interconnection services to competing telecom companies, said a federal court rejected its patent- infringement claim against a competitor.
The statement was made in a Sept. 2 regulatory filing.
Neutral Tandem sued Chicago’s Peerless Network LLC for patent infringement in federal court in Chicago in June 2008, claiming its patent 7,123,708 was infringed. The patent, which was issued in October 2006, covered a method of providing traffic routing services to public and private carrier networks.
Co-defendant with Peerless was its chief executive officer, John Barnicle, who previously had served as Neutral Tandem’s president and chief operating officer. While the complaint alleged Barnicle infringed by “directing and controlling the activities of Peerless,” there was no allegation of trade secret misappropriation.
According to the Sept. 2 filing, the court found the disputed patent invalid. Although Neutral Tandem didn’t say it would appeal, the company said it disagreed with the court’s findings.
The case is Neutral Tandem Inc. v. Peerless Network LLC, 1:08-cv-03402, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (Chicago).
McDermott Seeks Almost $500,000 From Ex-Patent Client Who Sued
McDermott Will & Emery LLP has fired back in a patent malpractice case by demanding almost $500,000 in legal fees from the former client who filed the suit.
Nomir Medical Technologies Inc. of Waltham, Massachusetts, sued the Chicago-based firm for malpractice in state court in July. Nomir’s technology involved the use of lasers to treat disorders such as periodontal disease and toenail fungus.
In the complaint, the medical-device company said problems with the law firm’s patent docketing system cost it damages of more than $143 million, including the loss of financing, suspension of clinical studies, the loss of more than two years of patent life, and erosion of confidence of investors, marketing partners and in the academic community. In addition to the firm, three individual lawyers from McDermott were named as defendants.
The law firm then asked that the case be transferred to federal court because so many of the issues raised dealt with federal patent law. The case was moved, and in late August, McDermott responded to the complaint by denying most of its allegations, and demanding what it says are past due legal fees of $490,857.65.
McDermott claimed in its court filings it fulfilled all the obligations and duties under its contract with Nomir, and that the device company failed to state a claim under which it was entitled to any recovery. It did acknowledge a “docketing system failure” resulted in the non-filing papers required by the patent office.
The law firm and its three lawyers are represented by Richard J. Rosensweig, Thomas J. Sartory, Derek B. Domian and Gary M. Ronan of Boston’s Goulston & Storrs PC.
Nomir is represented by Richard D. Cohan of Cohan Rasnick Myerson LLP of Boston.
The case is Nomir Medical Technologies Inc., v. McDermott Will & Emery LLP, 1:10-cv-11251-WGY, U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts (Boston).
Nike Seeks Patent on Shoe Construction for Safer Snowboarding
Nike Inc., the footwear manufacturer that’s seeking a patent for a self-lacing shoe, has also filed for a patent on a shoe with double tongues.
Application 20100180468 covers a technology to make the shoe stiffer, providing more protection for the foot. This would be desirable in a boot used for snowboarding, according to the patent.
One of the advantages of a double tongue is that the wearer could tuck part of the pants leg between the inner and outer tongue. The extra layers could protect the user’s ankles from injury in the event of collisions with tree branches or street rails, according to the application.
The application was filed January 2010, with the assistance of Harness, Dickey & Pierce PLC of Bloomfield Hills, Michigan.
Beaverton, Oregon-based Nike’s application for the automatic lacing system, akin to that seen on sneakers worn by Michael J. Fox in Steven Spielberg’s 1985 “Back to the Future” film was filed in 2008. That application -- 20090272007 -- involved the use of a motor contained in the shoe.
For more patent news, click here.
Copyright
Google Loses German Court Ruling Over YouTube Videos
Google Inc.’s YouTube video service lost a Hamburg court ruling over copyrighted video material that was posted online without permission for rebroadcast.
YouTube may be liable for damages involving material shown in violation of copyright law, the Hamburg Regional Court said Sept. 3 in an e-mailed statement.
The court in Hamburg declined two weeks ago to issue an emergency order forcing Google to block German access to some music videos on its YouTube website in a dispute over monitoring files on the Internet. Still, the judge in that case said he might ultimately rule in favor of a group of music-royalty collecting societies if they filed a new suit under standard court procedures.
Henning Dorstewitz, a spokesman for YouTube in Hamburg, said the company will appeal the ruling. He said that while the two cases are different, they involve similar issues.
“We will definitely appeal the decision,” he said in a phone interview. “It’s the same court and at the core, they are similar cases, about the liability of YouTube.”
Conrad Mueller-Horn, a spokesman for the Hamburg court, couldn’t be reached to comment. The court said in the statement that the case applies to three recordings by singer Sarah Brightman.
For more copyright news, click here.
Trademark
Port Brewing Sues Moylan’s Brewing for Trademark Infringement
Port Brewing LLC, a Southern California brewery, sued a Northern California brewhouse for trademark infringement.
Based in San Marcos, California, Port Brewing grew out of a pizza parlor in 1992. The company now makes at least 14 different brews, including “Santa’s Little Helper,” “Old Viscosity,” “Shark Attack,” and “Wipeout.”
The company uses stylized Celtic cross images for its brew taps and has filed applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to register them, the company said in the complaint it filed Sept. 2 in federal court in San Diego.
After a news story filmed at Moylan’s Brewery and Restaurant in Novato, California, was aired, Port Brewing saw “multiple confusingly similar stylized cross beer taps visibly featured in the background.” The San Marcos brew company said the news story aired in San Diego as well as in Northern California.
Moylan’s beer taps contain marks that so strongly resemble Port Brewing’s that consumers are likely to be confused, the company claims. Continued use of these marks “will cause irreparable damage,” Port Brewing claims.
It asked the court to order Moylan’s to quit using any marks that are confusingly similar to Port Brewing’s, and the destruction of all infringing articles in Moylan’s possession. Additionally, it seeks awards of money damages, profits attributable to the alleged infringement, and litigation costs.
Port Brewing is represented by Richardson C. Griswold of Griswold Law of Solana Beach, California.
The case is Port Brewing LLC v. Moylan’s Brewing Co, 3:19- cv-01826-IEG-NLS, U.S. District Court, Southern District of California (San Diego).
French Court Cuts EBay Fines in LVMH Trademark Infringement Case
A French appeals court slashed the fines EBay Inc. must pay in a suit over sales of counterfeit LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA goods from about 40 million euros ($51.3 million) to about 5 million euros.
Calvin Klein Loses European Trademark Appeal, Ordered to Pay
Phillips Van-Heusen Corp.’s Calvin Klein unit lost a European trademark challenge.
The European Union’s Court of Justice, in a Sept. 2 ruling, rejected the New York company’s attempt to block Spain’s Zafra Morroquineros SL’s application to register CK Creaciones Kennya as a trademark.
The court’s ruling affirmed both a lower-court ruling and an appeals board of the European Union’s Office for Harmonization of the Internal Market.
The Spanish company had applied in October 2003 to register its mark in the European Union for leather goods, clothing, shoes and headgear. Calvin Klein filed its initial opposition in September 2004, saying the marks were sufficiently similar to cause consumer confusion. Both marks featured the letters “CK.”
The lower court said that two sets of marks weren’t similar phonetically or conceptually, and that they didn’t share a common dominant element.
The Court of Justice agreed and also awarded the Spanish company’s litigation costs be paid by Calvin Klein.
For more trademark news, click here.
IP Moves
Simmons & Simmons Adds Ex-Howrey Litigator to IP Practice Group
Simmons & Simmons hired Marjan Noor for its IP practice, the London-based firm said in a statement.
Noor, who joins from Howrey LLP, is a patent litigator in the life sciences area. In addition to litigation, she has also handled pharmaceutical regulatory issues.
She practices in both U.K. courts and before the European Court of Justice.
Noor has an undergraduate degree in pharmacology, a law degree from London Guildhall University, and a diploma in intellectual property law from Bristol University.
To contact the reporter on this story: Victoria Slind-Flor in Oakland, California, at vslindflor@bloomberg.net.
Rate These Stories
Rate this Page