Virginia IP Law > Troutman Sanders LLP

26th Annual Virginia State Bar IP Seminar Sept. 19-20

Registration is now open for the 26th Annual VSB Intellectual Property Law CLE Weekend Seminar on September 19-20 at the Embassy Suites Hotel in Alexandria.  The seminar anticipates approval for eight hours of CLE, including two hours of ethics CLE.

The program includes presentations on Best Practices in Trademark Prosecution, Ethics in Trial Practice in the PTO, IP issues in 3-D Printing and Manufacturing, and a panel discusssion on appeals featuring judges from the Fourth Circuit, Federal Circuit and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.  Tony Dutra, Legal Editor for BNA’s Patent, Trademark and Copyright Journal, will speak at the CLE’s closing luncheon on Saturday.

Details about registration, and the full list of panels and speakers is available on the VSB’s website here.

August 18, 2014   Comments Off

Troutman Sanders Federal Circuit Review – August 15, 2014

FederalCircuitReviewheader

Each week, Troutman Sanders’ Federal Circuit review summarizes the Federal Circuit precedential patent opinions from the prior week.   

This week:

  • Claims Not Invalid for Lack of Written Description Where Specification Described Invention as “Broadly” Including a Component The the Claims Did Not Recite

[Read more →]

August 18, 2014   Comments Off

Corporate Affiliates Dismissed for Lack of Standing to Enforce Patents

Three related corporations, Hill-Rom Company (HRC), Hill-Rom Services, Inc. (HRS) and Hill-Rom Manufacturing, Inc. (HRM), brought suit against General Electric for patent infringement. HRM is the sole manufacturer of products embodying the patented inventions, and HRC sells and distributes those products, but HRS is the owner of the patents in suit. Even though Hill-Rom claimed that HRM and HRC were exclusive licensees with the right to enforce the patents, the Court held that they lacked standing and dismissed them from the suit. Hill-Rom Co., Inc. v. General Electric Co., Case No. 2:14CV187, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108428 (E.D.Va. Aug. 6, 2014), found here.

[Read more →]

August 7, 2014   Comments Off

Troutman Sanders Federal Circuit Review – July 29, 2014

FederalCircuitReviewheader

Each week, Troutman Sanders’ Federal Circuit review summarizes the Federal Circuit precedential patent opinions from the prior week.   

This week:

  • Defendant Forfeited Post-Verdict Motion for Judgement Because it Did Not Specifically Move for Same Before Submitting to the Jury
  • Appeal of Contempt Order with Injunction Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction 

[Read more →]

July 30, 2014   Comments Off

Pool Toy Patent Invalidated on Summary Judgment

Because invalidity must be proven with clear and convincing evidence, summary judgment of invalidity is rare. This is especially the case with claims of anticipation or obviousness, where a “battle of the experts” can easily create an issue of fact. In a recent case, though, Judge Davis of the Norfolk Division of the EDVA found, as a matter of law, that a patent on a self-propelled pool toy was either anticipated or rendered obvious by the prior art. Swimways Corp. v. Zuru, Inc., No. 2:13CV334, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98092 (E.D. Va. July 18, 2014), found here. [Read more →]

July 25, 2014   Comments Off

EDVA Rejects Argument That a Common Law Trade Dress Infringement Claim Is Subsumed by a Trademark Infringement Claim

Judge Liam O’Grady upheld a unanimous jury verdict in favor of Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for Eastern District of Virginia. The jury found that Handi-Foil Corporation willfully infringed on Reynolds’ trade dress rights. See Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc. v. Handi-Foil Corporation, No. 1:13-cv-214, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98059 (E.D. Va. July 18, 2014).

Both parties manufacture aluminum roll foil. Reynolds Wrap has been the leading brand for decades. Reynolds sued Handi-Foil in 2012 when it launched its version of the product claiming that the company’s packaging violated its trade dress. The jury found in favor of Reynolds on that count. By post-trial motion, Handi-Foil requested that the court set aside the verdict. Handi-Foil filed a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law and, in the alternative, moved for a new trial. In its argument for a new trial, Handi-Foil posited that the jury’s decision was inconsistent. [Read more →]

July 24, 2014   Comments Off

Troutman Sanders Federal Circuit Review – July 17, 2014

FederalCircuitReviewheader

Each week, Troutman Sanders’ Federal Circuit review summarizes the Federal Circuit precedential patent opinions from the prior week.   

This week:

  • Post-AIA False-Marketing Statute Survives Constitutional Challenge
  • Claims Issued as Invalid Cannot Be Asserted Until After Certificate of Correction Issues 
  • New Evidence Admissible in District Court Challenge of Interference Decision

[Read more →]

July 18, 2014   Comments Off

EDVA Judge Denies Preliminary Injunction in Patent Case

In a brief opinion, Judge Doumar denied Hill-Rom Company’s motion to preliminarily enjoin General Electric from infringing its patent covering a system to track hand hygiene for hospital workers. Hill-Rom Co., Inc. v. General Electric Co., No. 2:14CV187, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96258 (E.D. Va. July 15, 2014) (found here).

[Read more →]

July 17, 2014   Comments Off

EDVA Court Applies Justice O’Connor’s “Stream of Commerce-Plus” Approach in Dismissing Trademark Suit for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction

As we have previously noted, the law is unsettled as to what is necessary to establish personal jurisdiction under a “stream of commerce” theory – under which courts establish jurisdiction over a defendant by virtue of the defendant’s placing a product in the “stream of commerce” that takes the product to the forum state.  The theory has important implications for manufacturers, because companies that sell products that eventually reach a particular forum may find themselves subject to jurisdiction there under the stream of commerce theory, even if their presence in the forum is otherwise lacking.

In a recent case, Judge Ellis of the Eastern District of Virginia weighed in on the issue, ruling that in cases governed by Fourth Circuit law, Justice O’Connor’s “stream of commerce-plus” approach is the relevant test. AESP, Inc. v. Signamax, LLC, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92663 (E.D. Va. July 8, 2014). [Read more →]

July 16, 2014   Comments Off

Fourth Circuit: Not Every Case Involving a Trademark Involves a Federal Question

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently reversed the Eastern District of North Carolina, finding that simply because a case involves a trademark does not mean that the case also involves a federal question. Flying Pigs, LLC v. RRAJ Franchising, LLC, No. 13-2135 (4th Cir. July 1, 2014).

Flying Pigs initiated an action in North Carolina state court against RRAJ Franchising to enforce, by foreclosure and judicial sale, an equitable lien against certain trademarks and associated good will. RRAJ removed to federal court, asserting federal questions jurisdiction and citing the Lanham Act. The federal district court denied Flying Pigs’s motion to remand for lack of federal jurisdiction and then granted RRAJ’s 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. The Fourth Circuit vacated the dismissal order and remanded the matter to be returned to the state court. A matter does not implicate federal jurisdiction simply because it involves a trademark. [Read more →]

July 11, 2014   Comments Off