May. 23, 2017|By Gregory B. Collins
On May 22, 2017, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in TC Heartland, LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, LLC. In a unanimous 8-0 decision (Justice Gorsuch abstained), the United States Supreme Court held that venue for patent infringement actions is governed only by 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). This statute provides that “any civil action for patent infringement may be brought in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business.” With the Supreme Court’s decision in TC Heartland, patent infringement suit will now often take place in the defendant’s home-state.
May. 16, 2017|By Gregory B. Collins
Each year, Phoenix Magazine publishes lists of the top professionals and businesses in Phoenix. This year, three K&F attorneys were recognized in the May edition of Phoenix Magazine as "Top Attorneys." Geoffrey Kercsmar and Todd Feltus were recognized for their work in business litigation. Greg Collins was honored in the category of intellectual property litigation.
May. 01, 2017|By Gregory B. Collins
In May 2017, Acquisition International Magazine selected Kercsmar & Feltus "IP Litigator of the Year - Southwest USA.” The 2017 IP Excellence Awards recognize the very best intellectual property professionals across the industry, which includes copyright, trademark and patent litigation practices. Now in its fourth year, this awards showcase the major players within this industry for those who are seeking IP support services.
Mar. 28, 2017|By Gregory B. Collins
On March 24, 2017, K&F attorneys Gregory Collins and Geoffrey Kercsmar presented a mock Markman (patent claim construction) hearing for Arizona attorneys at the Third Annual CLE in the Gardens sponsored by the Intellectual Bar Section of the Arizona State Bar.
Oct. 05, 2016|By Molly Rogers
Tiffany & Co. has received a substantial $13.75 damages award in its trademark dispute with Costco Wholesale regarding Costco’s sale of imitation engagement rings under the “Tiffany” name. Costco’s liability was decided on summary judgment last year by Judge Swain of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Sep. 30, 2016|By Geoffrey S. Kercsmar
The U.S. Government estimates that trade secret theft costs the U.S. economy over $400 billion dollars annually. This isn’t new: trade secret theft has been a problem since the Industrial Revolution. For the most part, the federal government has remained silent on the issue and allowed states to address it on their own. Most states have enforced some variation of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. But recently, Congress has gotten involved to help curb the ongoing effects of trade secret theft.
Jun. 17, 2016|By Molly Rogers
When we advise our clients whether to litigate and how to litigate, the likelihood of an attorney fee award is paramount. Attorney fee awards are never a certainty. But knowing that you are likely to recover your fees at the conclusion of a case or may have to pay the other side’s fees often dictates litigation strategy. This week, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision that clarifies the standard for recovering attorney’s fees in copyright suits. This will allow us to better predict how the courts will rule on fee requests.
May. 19, 2016|By Gregory B. CollinsToday, the Washington Post published the results of its poll regarding the Washington Redskins’ name. In that poll of 502 Native American adults, 9 in 10 Native Americans said they were not offended by the name “Redskins.” Given the recent media coverage on this issue, the results of this poll are surprising. As the Washington Post article notes, 23% of non-Native American adults it surveyed find the name offensive. Put another way, non-Native Americans are actually more offended (at least percentage-wise) by the Washington Redskins' name than Native Americans. The poll results are more than just attention-grabbing, they may be legally relevant.
May. 17, 2016|By Gregory B. Collins
On behalf of our clients, we have alleged that a competitor falsely advertises it products as “natural” when the product contains synthetic materials. Some attorneys have argued that because the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has not defined “natural,” a jury is not competent to determine whether a product is in fact natural. Under this erroneous reasoning, a company could advertise any product as “natural,” no matter how artificial its ingredients. On April 12, 2016, the FTC made clear that Kercsmar & Feltus’s position on “natural” is the law.
Are Cheerleader Uniforms Copyrightable? Supreme Court Will Decide the Limits of Copyright ProtectionMay. 03, 2016|By Gregory B. Collins
On May 2, 2016, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands, Inc. It is well-settled that an artistic design on a piece of clothing is copyrightable. In Star Athletica, the Supreme Court will decide how far copyright protection stretches. Is a "creative arrangement of sequins, beads, ribbon, and tulle" copyrightable? The Court's decision will have wide ranging implications for the fashion and apparel industry. A decision is expected by June 2017.