Cases: Intellectual Property – Page 5

Intellectual Property: SCOTUS Looks To Attorney’s Fees Flexibility Under Octane Fitness/Highmark In Determining Standards For Treble Damages Of Awards In Exceptional Patent Cases

June 13, 2016

Flexibility, Not Rigid Tests, Is The Guiding Rule. Flexibility. Contortionist in tuxedo jacket, top hat, and tights performing surrounded by other performing contortionists. c1892. Library of Congress. In the dual cases of Octane Fitness/Highmark, the U.S. Supreme Court adopted a very flexible “under the circumstances” test for awarding attorney’s fees under a […]

Intellectual Property, POOF!, Celebrities: Ninth Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment In Favor Of Madonna, Producer Of The Song “Vogue,” And Others Based on De Minimis Copyright “Copying”

June 2, 2016

However, Attorney’s Fees Award For The Material Girl And Other Defendants Reversed Because Plaintiff’s Theory Was Not Objectively Unreasonable. Source: Wikipedia, Article “Madonna.” Author: Olavtenbroek. Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. Well, VMG Salsoul, LLC v. Madonna Ciccone, Nos. 13-57104/14-55837 (9th Cir. June 2, 2016) (published) does involve the “Material Girl”

Intellectual Property: Two Years After Octane Fitness—38% Of Fee Requests Granted

Cases: Intellectual Property

May 8, 2016

“The Recorder” Has Done A Survey Of Trends. According to a recent survey by “The Recorder,” federal district judges have granted 38% of fee requests since the U.S. Supreme Court announced the patent “exceptional” fee-shifting test in Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health and Fitness, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 1749 (2014). S.D.N.Y. is

Intellectual Property: Fifth Circuit Determines That Octane Fitness Patent Fee Standard Applies To Trademark Fee Recovery

Cases: Intellectual Property

May 4, 2016

Fifth Circuit Joins Same Conclusions Reached By Third and Fourth Circuits. In Baker v. Deshong, No. 14-11157 (5th Cir. May 3, 2016) (published), the Fifth Circuit decided that the U.S. Supreme Court’s standards for determining the propriety of a fee award in a patent case should also govern the adjudication of a Lanham

In The News . . . . Robin Thicke And Pharrell Williams Officially Dodge Attorney’s Fees Exposure In Marvin Gaye Copyright Infringement Suit

Cases: Intellectual Property, In The News

April 13, 2016

However, They Were Ordered To Pay 65% Of Certain Litigation Expenses. On March 19, 2016, we posted on U.S. District Judge John A. Kronstadt’s tentative decision to deny fees to Marvin Gaye’s estate in a copyright infringement case in which Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams were found to have infringed on one of

Intellectual Property/In The News: N.D. Ill. District Judge Awards All Of Requested $6,069,266.81 In Fees To Defendant Winning Patent Infringement Case

Cases: Intellectual Property

April 12, 2016

Fee Justified Because Case Was Exceptional, And No “Granular” Analysis Required By District Judge. In Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. v. International Securities Exchange LLC, Case No. 07 C 623 (N.D. Ill. Docket No. 778 Mar. 31, 2016), U.S. District Judge Joan H. Lefkow awarded CBOE all of its requested $6,069,266.81 in attorney’s

Intellectual Property, Section 998, Section 1717: Prevailing Defendants Properly Denied Fee Recovery, But Improperly Denied Expert Witness Fees

Cases: Intellectual Property, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Section 998

January 30, 2016

No Need to Provide Declarations From Expert Witness Fee In Support Of Expense Request Under CCP § 998. What happened in Nations Title Co. of Calif. v. Security Union Title Ins. Co, Case Nos. B250490/B253840 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 25, 2016) (unpublished), was that defendants won a jury verdict on a breach

Cases Under Review/Intellectual Property: SCOTUS Will Decide What Standard Applies In Making Award Of Attorney’s Fees Under Copyright Act Section 505

Cases: Cases Under Review, Cases: Intellectual Property

January 30, 2016

Certiorari Granted On January 15, 2016 From Second Circuit Denial Of Fees To Prevailing Defendant. The U.S. Supreme Court, on January 15, 2016, granted certiorari to resolve a split among circuit courts on the proper standard for awarding attorney’s fees under the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. § 505). The case is Kirtsaeng d/b/a

Intellectual Property: City Of Inglewood Must Pay Winning Copyright Infringement Defendant $117,741 In Attorney’s Fees And Costs

Cases: Intellectual Property

October 14, 2015

District Judge Found Suit Meritless And An Attempt To Stifle Political Speech. 17 U.S.C. § 505 is a section allowing a district judge to discretionarily award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs in a copyright infringement case. That section can be a powerful incentive to a plaintiff to make sure it brings a meritorious

Intellectual Property, Celebrities: S.D.N.Y. District Judge Awards $667,849.14 In Attorney’s Fees Out Of $2.4 Million Request To Beastie Boys Based On Willful Copyright Infringement Win Against Monster Energy Company

Cases: Celebrities, Cases: Intellectual Property

July 12, 2015

No Basis For Fees Under Lanham Act “Exceptional Case” Fee Shifting, With Fee Reductions Made For Partner Heavy Staffing, Inefficiencies, Unsuccessful Work Effort, And The Fee-Shifting Policy Underlying Copyright Act. Beastie Boys sued Monster Energy Company for copyright and trademark (false endorsement) infringement against Monster Energy Company, the maker of the Monster