By

 

Indianapolis, Indiana – Patent attorneys for Eli Lilly and Company of Indianapolis, IN, have initiated litigation alleging Sandoz, Inc. of Princeton, NJ, is infringing Patent No. 5,464,826, as issued by the U.S. Patent Officeand titled METHOD OF TREATING TUMORS IN MAMMALS WITH 2′,2′-DIFLUORONUCLEOSIDES.

The ‘826 patent covers the drug marketed under the name GEMZAR(R) for the treatment of abnormal masses of tissue known as neoplasms. The complaint states that, in a separate lawsuit, the ‘826 patent was found invalid on grounds of obviousness-type double patenting, but that Lilly has appealed to the Federal Circuit and believes the ruling will be reversed. Lilly also holds approved New Drug Application No. 20-509 for the use of GEMZAR(R) as a treatment for certain types of cancer.


Continue reading

By

 

Hammond, Indiana – Trademark counsel for Trans-United, Inc. of Burns Harbor, IN, have filed a lawsuit alleging Trans-United, Inc. of Miami, FL, and its apparent directors infringed Trademark Registration No. 3,567,262 for the mark TRANS-UNITED, as registered with the U.S. Trademark Office for various moving and transport services.

The plaintiff claims to provide “industrial and specialty moving and transport services” throughout the United States and that the defendants have provided moving services throughout the country under the names TRANS-UNITED and/or TRANS-UNITED INC. Plaintiff further claims it received complaints from the defendants’ disgruntled customers and that the defendants registered the Internet domain name transunitedinc.com. Accordingly, causes of action in the complaint include federal trademark infringement and false designation of origin under the Lanham Act, a violation of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act at 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d), and common law unfair competition.
Continue reading

By

 

Indianapolis, Indiana – Copyright lawyers for Masterfile Corporationof Ontario, Canada, have filed a lawsuit alleging Kemp Title Agency, LLC of Louisville, KY, has infringed copyrighted works which have been registered with the U.S. Copyright Office.

The plaintiff is a stock photography company offering images in exchange for a license fee, while the defendant provides services relating to the sale of property. After discovering certain of its copyrighted images on the defendant’s Web site, the plaintiff sued for an accounting of damages and an injunction, claiming a violation of its reproduction and public display rights under the Copyright Act.
Continue reading

By

 

The US Trademark Office issued the following 159 trademark registrations to persons and businesses in Indiana in July, 2010, based on applications filed by Indiana Trademark Attorneys:

 Reg. Number 

Mark

 Click to View
1           3,825,191 HELLOMETRO View
2           3,819,821 LASESAFE View
3           3,815,842 BALD SPOT SPORTS View
4           3,823,229 View
5           3,823,110 EVENTLOGIT View

Continue reading

By

 

Indiana patent attorneys obtained issuance of the following 100 patents from the US Patent Office to persons and businesses in Indiana in July, 2010:

 

PAT. NO.

 

Title

1

D620,585

Cooling nozzle

2

D620,559

Faucet

3

D620,558

Faucet

4

D620,402

Hydraulic cylinder unit

5

7,764,746

User terminal and base station using adapted codebook according to polarization

Continue reading

By

 

Indianapolis, Indiana – Copyright attorneys for Masterfile Corporation of Ontario, Canada, have filed a lawsuit alleging Mark Stein d/b/a ourdivorceagreement.com of Milltown, IN, infringed copyrighted works which have been registered with the U.S. Copyright Office.

The plaintiff is a stock photography company offering images in exchange for a license fee, while the defendant provides services relating to the sale of property. After discovering certain of its copyrighted images on the defendant’s Web site, the plaintiff sued for an accounting of damages and an injunction, claiming a violation of its reproduction and public display rights under the Copyright Act.

Continue reading

By

 

Indianapolis, Indiana – In a case which was originally brought in federal court in Chicago, patent lawyers for David O’Neill of Clarendon Hills, IL, have filed a lawsuit alleging that Roche Diagnostics Corporation of Indianapolis has been falsely, and intentionally, marking certain of its ACCU-CHEK(R) blood glucose monitoring products as protected by the following expired patents, all of which were issued by the U.S. Patent Office: Patent No. 4,891,319, titled PROTECTION OF PROTEINS AND THE LIKE; Patent No. 4,924,879, titled BLOOD LANCET DEVICE; and Patent No. 4,999,582, titled BIOSENSOR ELECTRODE EXCITATION CIRCUIT.

This type of case, in which an individual acts as a “private attorney general” and brings a lawsuit in the name of the government, is formally called a qui tam action. In his complaint, the plaintiff here makes the customary request that monetary damages be awarded in an amount up to $500 for each offense, with one-half going to the United States government and the other going to him as the party bringing this action.

Continue reading

By

 

Hammond, Indiana – Intellectual property counsel for J & J Sports Productions, Inc., of Campbell, CA, filed a lawsuit alleging Copper Penny Pub (and its owner Steve Hekkel) of Hammond, IN, improperly exhibited the Floyd Mayweather-Shane Moseley boxing match earlier this year. The plaintiff claims to hold the rights to distribute the broadcast of the fight and that the defendants “unlawfully intercepted, received and/or de-scrambled” the satellite signal of the broadcast and publicly showed it at the Copper Penny sports bar in Hammond. Violations of 47 U.S.C. §§ 553 and 605(a), which prohibit unauthorized reception and use of satellite and cable system transmissions, are asserted.

Continue reading

By

 

Chicago, IL – Copyright Infringement attorneys for Defendant CitiCorp succeeded in preserving a $750,000 recovery of attorneys fees.  The trial court had awarded the Defendant attorney’s fees after dismissing the Plaintiff software copyright infringement suit for “for want of prosecution” because it failed to prepare a proper proposed pre-trial order.  The court for the Seventh Circuit (which includes Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin) stated:

Continue reading

By

 Indianapolis, Indiana – Jill Wimberly, et al. of Indianapolis, IN, have filed, pro se (on their own behalf, rather than being represented by a lawyer), a lawsuit alleging that numerous large corporations, as well as the U.S. Patent Office, violated their “civil rights” in misappropriating the plaintiffs’ intellectual property. In particular, the plaintiffs claim to have designed a type of adult underwear for those experiencing incontinence which allegedly resembles products marketed by Procter & Gamble and Kimberly-Clark.
Continue reading

Contact Information
Indiana Intellectual Property: IP Litigation, Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights
  • Seventh Circuit
  • Northern District of Indiana
  • Southern District of Indiana
Paul B. Overhauser
Overhauser Law Offices, LLC
Greenfield
18 E Main St #202
Greenfield, IN 46140
Phone: 317.467.9100
Fax: 866.283.8549
Indianapolis
101 W Ohio St #2000
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: 317.891.1500
Fax: 866.283.8549

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2016 – 2025, Overhauser Law Offices, LLC
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design