New York – The New York Times reported earlier this week on Righthaven, LLC, a company that has sued hundreds of bloggers for copyright violation. The N.Y. Times story profiles one such blogger, Brian Hill, a 20 year-old North Carolina resident, who was sued by Righthaven after he used a photo of an airport security pat-down on his blog. Righthaven has filed over 250 copyright infringement lawsuits since its founding in 2010, including 24 in March 2011. According to reports, its business model is to purchase assignments of copyrights from newspapers and similar organizations and then search for infringing web postings to sue their publishers.

A Google search on Righthaven reveals that there are numerous websites devoted to condemning Righthaven, calling the company “a bottom feeding legal outfit” and “copyright trolls.” As the N.Y. Times story reported, copyright attorneys have questioned whether the fair use doctrine might protect some of the bloggers sued by Righthaven. The Media Bloggers Association has filed an amicus curiae brief support the rights of the bloggers and raising First Amendment issues. Other attorneys have accused Righthaven of fraud, according to a report from the Las Vegas Sun.

Practice Tip: Although Righthaven has not filed any copyright infringement lawsuits in Indiana district courts to date, this story illustrates the importance of ensuring that a web blogger has rights to use all materials that are posted on the blog. This story brings forth yet again the continuing controversies surrounding copyrights and the Internet.

 

Indianapolis, Indiana – Patent attorneys for Eli Lilly & Company of Indianapolis successfully blocked the release of generic versions of the anti-depression drug Cymbalta until the expiration of Lilly’s patent for the drug. Last week, Judge Tonya Walton Pratt of the Southern District of Indiana entered an order blocking eight competitor drug companies from releasing their generic versions of Cymbalta until Lilly’s patent expires. Lilly had been involved in this patent infringement lawsuit since 2008. The competitor drugs companies must also agree to notify the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that they will not seek approval for their generic drugs until Lilly’s patent expires. The patent at issue, Patent No. 5,023,269, which has been issued by the US Patent Office, is due to expire in June 2013, but may be extended.

According to the Indianapolis Business Journal, Lilly reported $2.77 billion in U.S. sales of Cymbalta in 2010. Lilly faces the expiration of several important revenue-generating patents in the next few years, including Cymbalta, Zyprexia, and Humalog.

The case was Eli Lilly & Company v. Wockhardt Limited et al., case number 1:08-cv-1547-TWP-TAB in the Southern District of Indiana before Judge Tanya Walton Pratt

 

Indianapolis, Indiana – In a patent infringement case, Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson of the Southern District of Indiana has denied defendants’ request to strike the report of an expert that the plaintiff had attached to a brief. The expert’s report contained a “readily-available summary of the infringement allegations.” The defendants had cited Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) as grounds to strike the expert’s report. The court in its order, however, noted that the Rule cited only applied to pleadings, not briefs, and therefore, was inapplicable. Furthermore, the court noted that the plaintiff had submitted the report for a limited purpose and “The Court will, therefore, only consider the report for that limited purpose, and only to the extent authorized by Federal Circuit precedent.”

This is a patent infringement case involving industrial wood veneer technology. The patent litigation attorneys of Overhauser Law Offices, the publisher of this site, represent Capital Machine Company in this litigation. The Indiana Intellectual Property Law and News Blog has previously blogged about the case. There are six patents at issue, all of which have been issued by the US Patent Office:

5,562,137 Method and Apparatus for Retaining a Flitch for Cutting

5,694,995 Method and Apparatus for Preparing a Flitch for Cutting

5,701,938 Method and Apparatus for Retaining a Flitch for Cutting

5,819,828 Method and Apparatus for Preparing a Flitch for Cutting

5,678,619 Method and Apparatus for Cutting Veneer from a Tapered Flitch

7,395,843 Method and Apparatus for Retaining a Flitch for Cutting

The Case No. is 1:09-cv-00702-JMS-DML, and the Order is below.
Continue reading

 

The US Trademark Office issued the following 166 trademark registrations to persons and businesses in Indiana in April, 2011, based on applications filed by Indiana Trademark Attorneys:

Reg. Number Mark Click to View
1 3,950,940 COR-NOC-ULAR THIS IS WHAT THE INDIANS USED BEFORE THEY HAD BINOCULARS. ANTIQUE AND COLLECTIBLE View
2 3,950,752 INTROCOMM View
3 3,950,619 TPNA View
4 3,950,576 WHEN YOUR SELF CAN’T FIND YOUR ESTEEM View
5 3,950,574 I AM ENOUGH View

Continue reading

 

Indianapolis, Indiana – The Southern District Court of Indiana has dismissed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Haycco LLC, a California limited liability company, finding a lack of personal jurisdiction. Traveler’s Joy, a Delaware Corporation, Haycco had been sued for trademark infringement, unfair competition, and dilution of trademark. Both companies provide a gift registry service that allows wedding guests to make monetary contributions to the bride and groom’s honeymoon. The complaint alleged infringement of US trademark registration nos. 3,560,502 and 3,718,357, which are for stylized logos of the word TRAVELER’S JOY for gift registration services. The plaintiff operates the website www.travelersjoy.com and defendant runs http://joyhoneymoon.com. Traveler’s Joy alleged that the marks were sufficiently confusing to cause economic harm to Traveler’s Joy. Indiana Intellectual Property Blog has previously blogged about this case.

Traveler’s Joy had claimed that Indiana’s Southern District Court should have personal jurisdiction over Haycco because the website operated by Haycco would allow customers in Indiana to complete transactions. The court, however, noted that no Indiana customers had never had any customers from Indiana and had blocked web transactions from Indiana. The court also noted that Haycco had no employees, property, or bank accounts in Indiana and had not directly targeted Indiana in its marketing efforts. The court, therefore, concluded that Haycco does not have the “minimum contacts” necessary to establish personal jurisdiction. The court dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice.

The publisher of this blog represented Haycco, who prevailed in the motion to dismiss.

 Indianapolis, IN – Patent lawyers for Simon Property Group of Indianapolis, Indiana filed a patent lawsuit against NorthMobileTech of Middleton, Wisconsin. In its complaint, Simon states that NorthMobileTech has accused Simon of infringing NorthMobileTech’s patent, and Simon believes a patent infringement lawsuit against it is imminent. On April 20, 2011, the same day as Simon’s patent attorneys filed its suit, patent attorneys for NorthMobileTech filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Simon in the Western District of Wisconsin.
Continue reading

 

Indianapolis, IN – Trademark and copyright lawyers for Coach of New York, New York filed two trademark and copyright infringement suit alleging that Indiana companies and individuals infringed several trademark and copyright registrations in the US Trademark Office and the US Copyright Office.

In the first infringement lawsuit, Coach alleges that Chaos of Muncie, Chaos on Campus, LLC and Teresa Barnes of Muncie, Indiana have been offering for sale and advertising Coach knock-off products. The complaint alleges that in February, the store was offering for sale fifty-five Coach knock-off items including flip-flops, handbags, wallets, and sunglasses. The complaint alleges trademark counterfeiting, trademark infringement, trade dress infringement, false designation of origin, false advertising, trademark dilution, copyright infringement, common law trademark infringement, common law unfair competition, forgery, and counterfeiting.

Continue reading

 

Evansville, IN – Trademark lawyers for Scores Holding Company of Utah filed a trademark infringement lawsuit alleging Scores, Inc. of Evansville, Indiana infringed trademark registration nos. 1,830,135; 1,830,405; 1,855,829; and 3,137,609 for marks at US Trademark Office.

According to the complaint filed by trademark attorneys for Scores Holdings, Scores Holdings created “the concept of high-end sophisticated gentleman’s club” and has a “famous and growing chain[.]” Scores Holding owns several federally registered trademarks in association with this business. Scores Holding alleges that Score’s of Evansville is also a gentleman’s club, but is not part of Scores Holding’s chain. The complaint alleges that Score’s of Evansville is a significantly lower quality establishment. Scores Holding claims that Score’s of Evansville is using the trademarked logo in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114. Scores Holding also claims false designation of origin, trademark dilution, and common law unfair competition. Intellectual property attorneys for Scores Holding have requested injunctive relief, damages and declaratory judgment.

This case has been assigned to Chief Judge Richard L. Youngand Magistrate Judge William G. Hussmannin the Southern District of Indianaand assigned case no. 3:11-cv-00053-RLY-WGH.
Continue reading

 

Indianapolis, IN – Pro se plaintiff Angela Ethel Brooks-Ngwenya of Fort Wayne, Indiana filed a copyright infringement suit alleging Indianapolis Public Schools (I.P.S.) infringed the copyrighted work “TIRS”-Transitioning Into Responsible Students, which has been registered by the US Copyright Office, Registration Number TX0006628223 / 2006-05-26.

Ms. Brook-Ngwenya has previously sued I.P.S. over alleged copyright infringement of TIRS, which Ms. Brooks-Ngwenya claims is an educational program she developed while working at I.P.S. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, however, dismissed the case two years ago, after determining that Ms. Brook-Ngwenya had not filed a notice to the Register of Copyrights. The Seventh Circuit Court opinion can be found here: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1349120.html. In her present lawsuit, Ms. Brooks-Ngwenya alleges copyright infringement and that an attorney involved committed misconduct in the prior case.

This case has been assigned to Judge Sarah Evans Barker and Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore in the Southern District of Indianaand assigned case no. 1:11-cv-00483-SEB-MJD.
Continue reading

Contact Information