Topic
Every decision we've filed under Intellectual Property.
The Ninth Circuit dismissed Apple's appeal of a district court order granting discovery under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 because the scope of the required production remained undetermined. The panel held that without a final determination of what documents must be produced, the order was not a final judgment subject to appellate review.
The Second Circuit affirmed that purchasing a competitor's trademark as a search keyword does not inherently constitute trademark infringement under the Lanham Act. The court held that because the resulting advertisements and landing pages did not display the plaintiff's marks, there was no plausible likelihood of consumer confusion.
The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a dispute over solar interconnection tax fees, ruling that federal courts lack subject-matter jurisdiction. The court held that the underlying tax questions were not substantial enough to support federal jurisdiction over state-law claims.
The Third Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Elmagin's post-trial motions, upholding a jury verdict that found trade secrets existed but were not misappropriated. The court also confirmed that attorneys' fees claims in trade secret cases are matters for the judge, not a jury.
The Third Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of post-trial motions in a trade secret dispute, upholding a jury verdict that found the strategies were trade secrets but not misappropriated. The court also rejected a request for a jury trial on the issue of attorney's fees, ruling that such determinations are matters of law for the judge.
The Third Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Elmagin's motions for judgment as a matter of law and a new trial in a trade secret dispute. The appellate court held that the jury's verdict, which found the strategies were trade secrets but not misappropriated, was supported by sufficient evidence.
The Third Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Elmagin's motions for judgment as a matter of law and a new trial regarding trade secret misappropriation claims. The court held that the jury's verdict, which found trade secrets existed but were not misappropriated, was supported by sufficient evidence.