The US Trademark Office issued the following 125 trademark registrations to persons and businesses in Indiana in March, 2011, based on applications filed by Indiana Trademark Attorneys:
|
Reg. Number |
Mark |
Click to View | ||
| 1 | 3,938,020 | GRAY STOP | View | |
| 2 | 3,937,998 | {Design} | View | |
| 3 | 3,937,984 | RED HUNNEY | View | |
| 4 | 3,937,979 | SOFT N’ GOOD | View | |
| 5 | 3,937,961 | WILDEBEEST | View |
Indianapolis, IN – Patent lawyers for Masco Corporation of Indiana of Indianapolis, IN filed a patent infringement suit alleging Sir Faucet, LLC of Toledo, OH infringed Patent No. 7,753,079, MAGNETIC COUPLING FOR SPRAYHEADS, and Patent No. 7,909,061, MAGNETIC COUPLING FOR SPRAYHEADS, which have been issued by the US Patent Office. Masco does business under the name Delta, and is a fairly frequent litigant in patent infringement lawsuits. Another Masco lawsuit in Indiana is discussed on this site here. Also, Masco was recently sued for patent infringement by one of its major competitors, Moen. That complaint is here. Given that Moen and Sir Faucet suits were filed at about the same time, and that Sir Faucet is located in Northern Ohio where Moen is located, there may be some connection between these two suits.
While the Indiana suit contains a boilerplate allegation “upon information and belief” that Sir Faucet is “making using, importing, selling, or offering for sale in the United States, including the Southern District of Indiana, products and/or services embodying the patent inventions,” it lacks the type of supporting detail that may be required to prove personal jurisdiction. The complaint also alleges in paragraph 12 that the case is “exceptional,” but states no fact to support this conclusion. If a court finds a case to be “exceptional,” it may award a prevailing party treble damages and attorney’s fees.
Practice Tip: If a defendant is selling an infringing product in the jurisdiction where a plaintiff desires to file a suit, it is helpful to make a representative purchase in that jurisdiction, and reference the sale in the Complaint. This may thwart an attempt by the defendant to have the case dismissed or transferred to the defendant’s preferred venue.
This case has been assigned to Judge Sarah Evans Barker and Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch in the Southern District of Indiana, and assigned case no. 1:11-cv-00404-SEB-DML.
South Bend, IN – An intellectual property attorney for Garden Homes, of St. Joseph County, Indiana, filed a copyright and trade dress infringement lawsuit against Charles and Maura Weis, of Florida, and Ryan Rans, of Indiana. Charles Weis is the former head coach of the Notre Dame‘s football team. The copyrighted work is custom plans for homes and has been registered by the US Copyright Office.
Continue reading
South Bend, IN – The U.S. District Court of South Carolina has transferred a patent infringement case to Northern District Court of Indiana. The transfer comes after the South Carolina District Court granted the defendant’s motion to transfer the case. Ford Meter Box had moved to dismiss the complaint pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and had asked for transfer to the Northern District of Indiana pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) in the alternative.
Continue reading
The White House has published a White Paper proposing criminalization of many actions associated with intellectual property. It suggests greater rights and more severe penalties “so as to more effectively address the substantial harm caused by intellectual property crimes.”
In summary, the revisions include:
Creating a right of public performance for copyright owners for sound recordings transmitted by over-the-air broadcast stations
Continue reading
South Bend, IN – Copyright lawyers for Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI) of New York filed a copyright infringement suit alleging Olive’Or Twist Bar of Elkhart, Indiana and its owner infringed the copyrights of the copyrights to certain songs to which BMI owns the exclusive broadcast license. Nine other companies, the copyright owners of the songs at issue, have also joined the copyright infringement lawsuit as plaintiffs.
Continue reading
New Albany, IN – Patent lawyers for CSP Technologies, Inc. of Auburn, AL, filed a patent infringement suit alleging Sud-Chemie AG of Munich, Germany; Sud-Chemie, Inc., of Louisville, KY; and Airsec S.A.S. of Choisy-le-Roi, France infringed Patent No. 7,537, 137, titled RESEALABLE MOISTURE TIGHT CONTAINER ASSEMBLY FOR STRIPS AND THE LIKE HAVING A LIP SNAP SEAL, as issued by the U.S. Patent Office.
New Albany, IN – Trademark lawyers for The American Automobile Association of Heathrow, Florida filed a lawsuit alleging AAA Affordable Insurance of Charlestown, Indiana, infringed Trademark Nos. 829,265, 2,158,654 and 1,101,726 for the mark AAA, as registered with the U.S. Trademark Office, and committed unfair competition and cyberpiracy.
Continue reading
Indianapolis — The New York Times reported this week that the pharmaceutical industry may lose billions as a result of the patent expirations in 2011. The article notes that many pharmaceutical companies may not have enough new drugs in research in development to replace the income lost due to these expirations. The Indiana’s Eli Lilly is mentioned, specifically noting that Lilly’s setback the development of an Alzheimer’s drug.
Washington, D.C. – Yesterday the United States Senate passed a landmark patent reform bill that will adopt a first-inventor-to-file system. Senate Bill 23 will also create an independent funding system and create a post-grant review process. The Senate has been looking at patent reform since 2005. Indiana Senators Dan Coats and Richard Lugar both voted in favor of the bill, which passed 95-5.
The bill now goes to the U.S. House of Representatives, where it will first be heard by the Judiciary Committee. The chairman of the judiciary committee, Representative Lamar Smith, has already made favorable comments about the bill. In a press release, he stated “Adopting a first-inventor-to-file standard creates certainty about patent ownership and makes it easier for American innovators to apply for patents around the world. The post-grant review process helps to reduce frivolous lawsuits filed by holders of weak or overbroad patents. And allowing for the third party submission of prior art helps prevent bad patents from being granted in the first place. These are just a few of the many provisions for which there is widespread support.”
