Looking for a Few Good Patent Attorneys?

     If you're looking for a registered patent attorney (or patent agent) in Maryland near you, visit this website, which provides a map showing the location of registered patent attorneys and agents in Maryland based on address information supplied to the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office's Office of Enrollment, and their names and addresses.  Rolling over the pointing tabs on the map brings up the practitioner's name and contact information. A snapshot of the map is shown below.  Hat tip to Ryan Durham for providing the app and the link.

 

 

 

Law Article: Assertion of Military and State Secrets Privilege by Government in Patent Cases on the Rise

     In their forthcoming Berkeley Technology Law Journal article (alternative link), visiting University of Maryland Associate Professor of Law Davida Isaacs and University of Kentucky Assistant Professor of National Security Robert Farley discuss the Military and State Secret Privilege and its negative impact on innovation, the discovery process, and government procurement.  As previously noted on this blog, the counties surrounding Washington, D.C., are home to many government contractors, possibly triggering use of the privilege.

     In the article, Isaacs and Farley review the Federal Circuit's Crater Corp. v. Lucent Techs., 423 F.3d 1260 (Fed. Cir. 2005), cert. denied, 547 U.S. 1218 (2006), case in some depth, suggesting that there are some troubling constitutional issues regarding the assertion of the privilege, and arguing that widespread use of the privilege could have a significant negative effect on military innovation and procurement.  On the former point, where the information involved constitutes “trade secrets”, the authors point out that effective quashing of litigation through invocation of the privilege arguably amounts to an unconstitutional taking. On the latter, the authors note that loose use of privilege endangers the intellectual property rights of companies interested in doing business with the military, and in particular of small companies that cannot depend either on their connections with the Pentagon or on an expectation of repeat business for protection. (This is particularly problematic given the stated interest of the Pentagon in pursuing non-traditional defense contractors for innovative technologies.)

     The Military and State Secrets Privilege has been receiving an enormous amount of attention lately, write Isaacs and Farley.  As the article also notes, just a few months ago Congress proposed legislation that is meant to rein in the Government’s use of the privilege, or at least encourage independent judicial consideration of the privilege’s application. But, the authors argue, particularly with regard to the use of intellectual property, this legislation still does not go far enough in ameliorating the negative effects described above.

 

  • Cite:  D. Isaacs and R. Farley, Privilege-Wise and Patent (and Trade Secret)-Foolish?: How the Courts’ Misapplication of the Military and State Secrets Privilege Violates the Constitution and Endangers National Security; 23 Berkeley Tech. L.J. __ (2009) (forthcoming).

Judgment Against American Mensa in Trademark Dispute

  • UPDATE: American Mensa, Ltd. v. Inpharmatica, Ltd. et al., No. 07-3283 (D. Md filed Dec. 6, 2007); assigned to J. Quarles

     As previously reported on this website, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland granted in part and denied in part Defendants' motion for summary judgment in the case of American Mensa v. Inpharmatica. In doing so, the court found in favor of Mensa on Defendants' motion for summary judgment of no trademark infringement or unfair competition because genuine issues of fact remained, but granted Defendants' motion for summary judgment of no trademark dilution because there was no evidence that Mensa's mark is famous. Now, after trial, a jury has returned its verdict form, finding in favor of the Defendants including, among other things, a finding that “Defendant’s use of the 'Admensa' and 'ADMEnsa' [marks] was not likely to cause confusion, or cause mistake, or to deceive about the affiliation, connection, or association of the Defendants with American Mensa as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of their goods or services by American Mensa.” Judgment was entered by Judge Quarles on May 5, 2009.

Cigarette Patent Case Resumes With Jury Trial

  • UPDATE: Star Scientific vs. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

     Next Monday, Petersburg, Virginia-based Star Scientific, Inc. and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. will resume their battle over allegations of RJR's infringement of Star's U.S. Patent Nos. 6,202,649 and 6,425,401, as the parties open the first of five days of their jury trial in the courtroom of the Honorable Marvin Garbis of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. Star's lawsuit has a long history, including a bench trial on the issue of the enforceability of the asserted patents in 2005. On June 25, 2007, Judge Garbis found Star’s patents to be unenforceable on the basis of inequitable conduct by Star’s attorneys during prosecution of the patents before the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Judges Michel, Dyk, and Schall) reversed, and now the case is back before the trial court. Start time: 10:00 am, May 18.

Related posts:  Inequitable ConductConspiracy Theory

Fourth Circuit: Turnitin's Anti-Plagiarism Service a Fair Use

  • A.V. (Minors) v. iParadigms, LLC, No. 08-1424 and 08-1480 (4th Cir. Apr. 16, 2009)

     Plaintiffs, four minors (who at the time of their complaint attended high schools in McLean, VA, and Tucson, AZ), brought a copyright infringement suit against iParadigms, LLC, based on the company's use of essays and other papers written by plaintiffs for submission to their high school teachers through an online service operated by iParadigms called "Turnitin Plagiarism Detection Service." 

     According to iParadigms, Turnitin offers high school and college educators an automated means of verifying whether works submitted by students are originals and not the products of plagiarism. When a school subscribes to iParadigms’ service, it typically requires its students to submit their written assignments "via a web-based system available at www.turnitin.com or via an integration between Turnitin and a school’s course management system."  The website uses a "click-wrap" agreement (outlining terms and conditions) for site use. Turnitin then compares the submitted paper and produces a report for teachers suggesting a percentage of the work, if any, that appears not to be original. 

     Three of the students submitted papers with a disclaimer objecting to the archiving of their works. Plaintiffs alleged that iParadigms infringed their copyright interests in their works by archiving them in the Turnitin database without their permission.

     The issue for the Fourth Circuit was whether the archiving of the students' works was a "fair use," one of the statutory exceptions to a copyright owner’s bundle of rights (17 U.S.C. § 107). In reaching its decision, the Fourth Circuit considered the four nonexclusive factors in making a "fair use" determination: 

 

Continue Reading...

Hanna-Barbera Productions Opposes Registration of Yogiberry Trademark

     Rockville, MD-based Yogiberry, Inc., filed an application for registration of the mark YOGIBERRY in the U.S. Trademark Office on March 11, 2008, which was approved for publication and subsequently published for opposition on September 2, 2008.  On November 21, 2008, Hanna-Barbera Productions, Inc., owner of several marks related to the Yogi Bear franchise of cartoons that first appeared on television in 1958, filed an opposition.  In its answer to the opposition, Yogiberry stated that its mark is related to retail frozen yogurt stores, and does not overlap with any goods and services associated with Hanna-Barbera's YOGI BEAR MARKS.  Yogiberry further stated that the parties' respective marks are not confusingly similar or likely to cause confusion amongst consumers or the trade.

     Yogiberry, Inc., is the owner of Registration No. 3498624 for the mark shown below, which was registered on September 9, 2008, based on an application filed February 4, 2008:

     In view of the above opposition, Yogiberry, Inc., and Pinkberry, Inc., filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland a stipulated motion to a stay their pending trademark litigation.  The parties' motion was granted.

Settlement News and MD Bar Association Events

  • Many of you have inquired about the status of the Nacre v. Silynx Communications matter, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland on October 2, 2007.  I am not surprised by the interest, since this case has garnered more attention by visitors to the Maryland Intellectual Property Law blog than any other reported case.  What is known about the settlement, which is not much, is that the parties settled their dispute (see Nacre press release).  As is often the case with such matters, the terms of the settlement are confidential.  Nacre's website states that the settlement provides for the dismissal with prejudice of all claims and counterclaims filed by the parties, and without any finding or admission of liability or wrongdoing by any party, and it grants to Rockville, MD-based Silynx a license to certain Nacre intellectual property, including the two Nacre patents-at-issue (link, link).

Please support the IP Section and attend one of these or other upcoming events.  If you missed an event, the IP Section website contains links to audio files of previous events that are free to download.

Number of Copyright Lawsuits in Maryland Increases

     Data available from Justia.com shows that the number of copyright lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (Greenbelt and Baltimore divisions combined) in 2008 (40; see table below comparing Districts) was higher than the number initiated in 2007 (30). The number of defendants named in those lawsuits was also higher year over year (about 120 defendants in 2008 compared to about 60 in 2007).

Tech Council Urges IP Legislation for Clean Technology

     In its 2009 Policy Platform for Technology and Biotechnology published earlier this month, the Technology Council of Maryland (TCM) called for funding and targeted legislation for the state's technology and biotechnology industries, but also urged incentives, financing, tax credits and intellectual property legislation "that will spur the potential for making Maryland a leader in clean and green technology."  The TCM is Maryland's largest technology trade association (500+ members). 

     Does Maryland need incentives to encourage the development of clean and green technologies? If the number of clean energy patents issued to Marylanders is any indication, the answer is yes.  According to U.S. Patent Office data, there were only 11 patents issued in 2008 naming at least one Maryland resident as an inventor that disclosed "fuel cell" (down from 17 in 2007), 11 patents to Maryland inventors that disclosed "hybrid", "electric," and "vehicle" in 2008 (up from 7 in 2007), and only one patent to Maryland inventors that disclosed "wind power" in 2008 (half as many as the 2 patents issued in 2007). Although that snapshot view is far from a scientific and robust analysis, it seems that Maryland trails other states in clean technology innovation (Michigan, for example, received a total of 29 clean energy patents in the 3Q 2008 alone, and New York received 21 in 3Q 2008, according to data published by the Clean Energy Patent Growth Index).

Number of Trademark Lawsuits Initiated in Maryland Increases

      Data available from Justia.com shows that the number of trademark lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (Greenbelt and Baltimore divisions combined) in 2008 (36; see table below comparing Districts) was slightly higher than the number initiated in 2007 (33). The number of parties named in those lawsuits was also higher year over year (about 160 parties in 2008 compared to about 100 parties in 2007).