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:
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
South Bend, Indiana – Trademark lawyers for 1A Smart Start, Inc. of Irving, TX, have filed a lawsuit alleging Indiana Safe Start Inc. and Thomas Bjornstad, both of Elkhart, IN, have infringed, among other things, Trademark Reg. No. 2,170,846 for the mark SMART START, which has been registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in connection with “electronic breath activated ignition lock for automobiles.”
Allegedly, the defendant Bjornstad previously contacted the plaintiff’s franchisee in Indiana and expressed an interest in becoming a franchisee himself, but subsequently began using the mark SAFE START in connection with products similar to those of the plaintiff. In addition to trademark infringement under the federal Lanham Act, additional causes of action allege false designation of origin and unfair competition.
Continue reading
Fort Wayne, Indiana – Copyright lawyers for Amy and James Ortega of Joplin, MO, have initiated litigation against Forks RV of Shipshewana, IN, and its agents, alleging they infringed a copyrighted work which has been registered with the U.S. Copyright Office.
The defendants manufacture and “up-fit” recreational vehicles. The complaint alleges that the plaintiffs and defendants forged a business relationship after the plaintiffs conceived of a use for “fifth wheel” trailers in the equine market. After a falling out, the plaintiffs claim that the defendants have infringed the plaintiffs’ copyrights in the equine trailer designs and drawings. Another cause of action claims a breach of an implied contract after the plaintiffs conferred benefits, such as a new customer base and marketing efforts, without receiving compensation.
Continue reading
South Bend, Indiana – Patent lawyers for MedIdea, LLC of Longview, TX, filed a patent infringement suit alleging Zimmer Holdings, Inc. of Warsaw, IN, is infringing the following patents issued by the U.S. Patent Office: 6,200,350 and 6,383,225, which relate to proximal femoral prostheses, and Nos. 6,267,785, 6,379,391, 6,398,812, 6,821,300, and 7,229,478 which relate to prosthetic shoulder implants.
This case has been assigned to Judge Joseph Van Bokkelenand Magistrate Judge Christopher A. Nuechterlein in the Northern District of Indiana, and assigned case no. 3:10-cv-00283-JVB-CAN.
Continue reading
Fort Wayne, Indiana – Trademark lawyers for Sweetwater Sound, Inc. of Fort Wayne, IN, filed a lawsuit alleging J2 Electronics Group, Ltd. d/b/a Audiolines.com of Chicago infringed Trademark Registration No. 3,652,215 for the mark SWEETWATER, as registered with the U.S. Trademark Office in connection with, among other things, audio recording equipment and online retail store services.
Both parties are in the business of selling “audio recording and reproduction equipment, musical instruments and accessories.” The plaintiff asserts in its complaint that the defendant has misappropriated the registered trademark and is using it in connection with the sale of musical recording products and on its Web site.
Indianapolis, Indiana – Trademark lawyers for Brandt Industries Ltd. of Saskatchewan, Canada, have brought a declaratory judgment action concerning the mark BRANDT, as used in connection with agricultural equipment and the manufacture thereof. The existence of the requisite “actual controversy” is based on the defendant, Pitonyak Machinery Corporation of Carlisle, AR, allegedly previously claiming to the plaintiff that the plaintiff’s use of the mark is infringing.
The mark at issue is not currently registered with the U.S. Trademark Office, but both parties have used the mark for several decades in different geographic areas. The plaintiff cites its prior “common law” rights in the mark, based on its continuous use of the mark in commerce, and requests that the court declare, among other things, that this use is non-infringing.
Indiana patent attorneys obtained issuance of the following 94 patents from the US Patent Office to persons and businesses in Indiana in June, 2010:
|
|
PAT. NO. |
|
Title |
|
1 |
Method and system for supply chain product and process development collaboration |
||
|
2 |
|||
|
3 |
|||
|
4 |
Method and device for an actuator motor including an air-actuated brake device |
||
|
5 |
Indianapolis, Indiana – Patent infringement lawyers for Eli Lilly and Company of Indianapolis, IN, filed a complaint alleging Actavis Totowa LLC of Little Falls, NJ, and Actavis Elizabeth LLC of Elizabeth, NJ, are infringing Patent No. 5,464,826, titled METHOD OF TREATING TUMORS IN MAMMALS WITH 2′,2′-DIFLUORONUCLEOSIDES and issued by the U.S. Patent Office.
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
The US Trademark Office issued the following 157 trademark registrations to persons and businesses in Indiana in June, 2010, based on applications filed by Indiana Trademark Attorneys:
|
Reg. Number |
Mark |
Click to View | ||
| 1 | 3,804,926 | Z-TRAK PLUS | View | |
| 2 | 3,801,222 | COUNTER CULTURE BY PATACHOU | View | |
| 3 | 3,799,569 | CHARLOTTE | View | |
| 4 | 3,804,373 | VENTLINE | View | |
| 5 | 3,805,534 | INTERACTION CENTER PLATFORM | View |
