Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- an article noting how the Federal Circuit recently held oral argument in a case asking “whether prosecution laches is a legitimate doctrine that can render any patent unenforceable if it takes longer than six years to obtain the patent from the United States Patent and Trademark Office”;
- a blog post discussing how the Federal Circuit recently “issued a significant trade secret remedies decision”;
- a report highlighting a recent Federal Circuit trademark case holding that “acquired distinctiveness is ‘determined on the entire record'”; and
- a piece asserting a recent Federal Circuit trademark decision ”goes beyond financial services and has implications for brands across industries.”
Gene Quinn penned an article for IP Watchdog noting how the Federal Circuit recently held oral argument in a case asking “whether prosecution laches is a legitimate doctrine that can render any patent unenforceable if it takes longer than six years to obtain the patent from the United States Patent and Trademark Office.” Quinn suggested this is an important question because the Federal Circuit previously held that “a patent is presumed unenforceable if prosecution took longer than six years.”
Dennis Crouch wrote a blog post for PatentlyO discussing how the Federal Circuit recently “issued a significant trade secret remedies decision.” Crouch covered how the court made several holdings in the case, most notably that “a trade secret becomes accessible when it ‘could have‘ been reverse-engineered, not when it actually was reverse-engineered.” For more information, check out the relevant opinion in ams-OSRAM USA Inc. v. Renesas Electronics America, Inc.
Ivan Moreno filed a report for Law 360 highlighting a recent Federal Circuit trademark case holding that “acquired distinctiveness is ‘determined on the entire record.'” Moreno explained how “acquired distinctiveness is harder to prove with a highly descriptive term.” For more information, check out the relevant opinion in Heritage Alliance v. American Policy Roundtable.
The Fashion Law authored a piece asserting a recent Federal Circuit trademark decision ”goes beyond financial services and has implications for brands across industries.” The author discussed more specifically how the Federal Circuit’s ruling “offers guidance for a broad array of consumer goods brands – from fashion firms and sportswear companies to jewelry brands and automakers – that are increasingly stretching their trademarks into adjacent sectors in a bid to cater to consumers.” For more information, check out the relevant opinion in Dollar Financial Group v. Brittex Financial.