Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
04-16677
|
LGS Architects Inc. v. Concordia Homes of Nevada
Architect was entitled to injunction to enjoin developer from certain potential infringing conduct despite developer's representation that alleged conduct had ceased. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Apr. 7, 2006 | |
H026757
|
Ajaxo Inc. v. E*Trade Group Inc.
Trial court erred in granting defendants' motion for nonsuit on damages for defendants' misappropriation of plaintiff's trade secrets. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Mar. 29, 2006 | |
03-57052
|
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. v. Entertainment Distributing
General Dwight Eisenhower wrote war memoirs as work for hire even though he was not employee of publisher. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Feb. 14, 2006 | |
04-57189
|
Milne v. Stephen Slesinger Inc.
Termination provision of Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 does not apply to post-1978 agreements. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Feb. 14, 2006 | |
03-17323
|
Altera Corp. v. Clear Logic Inc.
Award of $30 million for infringement of Semiconductor Chip Protection Act is upheld. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Dec. 11, 2005 | |
B181405
|
Advanced Modular Sputtering Inc. v. Superior Court (Sputtered Films Inc.)
Equipment manufacturer's identification of alleged trade secret was sufficient to allow discovery to commence in misappropriation lawsuit. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Nov. 29, 2005 | |
03-55957
|
M2 Software Inc. v. Madacy Entertainment
In trademark infringement action, district court correctly ruled that no rational trier fact could find likelihood of confusion. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Nov. 21, 2005 | |
03-16987
|
Arizona Cartridge Remanufacturers Association v. Lexmark International Inc.
Manufacturer of print cartridges can legally enforce post-sale restriction under patent law. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Nov. 21, 2005 | |
03-16218
|
Yellow Cab Co. of Sacramento v. Yellow Cab of Elk Grove Inc.
Burden of proof regarding validity and protectability of unregistered mark lies with party seeking trademark protection. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Nov. 15, 2005 | |
03-56703
|
Kourtis v. Cameron
Owners of film concept can bring infringement lawsuit against James Cameron. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Nov. 15, 2005 | |
01-56055
|
KP Permanent Make-Up Inc. v. Lasting Impression I Inc.
Make-up company's non-generic use of words 'micro colors' is protected under trademark law. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Aug. 23, 2005 | |
03-35375
|
American Circuit Breaker Corp. v. Oregon Breakers Inc.
District court properly dismissed trademark infringment and unfair competition claims because 'likelihood of confusion' did not exist. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Jul. 13, 2005 | |
02-17064
|
Surfvivor Media Inc. v. Survivor Productions
Reality show producers did not commit trademark infringement by creating mark similar to plaintiff's. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Jul. 13, 2005 | |
04-480
|
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster
Company that distributes free software to promote copyright infringement is liable for resulting acts of infringement by third parties, |
Intellectual Property |
|
Jul. 5, 2005 | |
03-55894
|
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd.
Distributors of peer-to-peer file-sharing computer networking software are not liable for copyright infringements by users. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Jul. 1, 2005 | |
04-55962
|
Bosley Medical Institute Inc. v. Kremer
Defendant must have bad faith intent to profit to be liable for cybersquatting. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Jun. 20, 2005 | |
01-56069
|
Silvers v. Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc.
Assignee to infringement claim with no interest in copyright itself may not institute action for infringement. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Jun. 20, 2005 | |
03-55823
|
Watec Co. Ltd. v. Liu
Court cannot award attorney fees based on jury finding that trademark infringement was intentional. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Jun. 20, 2005 | |
03-1237
|
Merck KGAA v. Integra Lifesciences I LTD
Drug maker did not infringe patents by supplying drugs for pre-clinical research. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Jun. 15, 2005 | |
00-57118
|
Grupo Gigante SA De CV v. Dallo & Co. Inc.
Mexican company can protect its trademark if mark achieved secondary meaning and is familiar to substantial percentage of consumers in relevant market. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Apr. 7, 2005 | |
03-16034
|
Rossi v. Motion Picture Association of America Inc.
Motion picture trade association had 'good faith belief' that website was illegally infringing on copyrights. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Mar. 18, 2005 | |
G033363
|
Superbrace Inc. v. Tidwell
California contract law permits patent licensee to transfer license without consent of licensor. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Feb. 14, 2005 | |
04-35031
|
PlayMakers LLC v. ESPN Inc.
Plaintiff did not demonstrate sufficient likelihood of success on merits to warrant injunction in trademark infringement case. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Jan. 21, 2005 | |
03-55238
|
Laparade v. Ivanova
Production companies enjoy rights as 'authors' of 34 Spanish-language motion pictures under Mexican law. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Jan. 10, 2005 | |
02-55983
|
Newton v. Diamond
Composer fails to demonstrate that rap group Beastie Boys' use of his composition was substantial enough for copyright infringement. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Jan. 10, 2005 | |
03-409
|
KP Permanent Make-Up Inc. v. Lasting Impression I Inc.
Fair use defense in trademark infringement case does not shift burden of proof to defendant. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Dec. 15, 2004 | |
01-56055
|
KP Permanent Make-Up, Inc. v Lasting Impression I, Inc.
In trademark action between make-up manufacturers, court erred in finding that term 'micro colors' was generic and descriptive. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Dec. 8, 2004 | |
02-35856
|
Creative Computing v. Getloaded.com
Damage floor in Computer Fraud and Abuse Act contains no 'single act' requirement. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Dec. 5, 2004 | |
03-55114
|
Jerry's Famous Deli Inc. v. Papanicolaou
Court will reconsider profits that restaurant owner should disgorge for unlawfully using 'Famous Deli' trademark. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Nov. 9, 2004 | |
03-35188
|
Polar Bear Productions Inc. v. Timex Corp.
Jury's award of damages against watchmaker for unauthorized use of footage from copyrighted film was not supported by sufficient evidence. |
Intellectual Property |
|
Oct. 25, 2004 |