News & Analysis as of

Intellectual Property Litigation › Intellectual Property Protection › International Trade

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

In Limited Cases, Foreign Trademarks Can Affect U.S. Registration Rights

Farella Braun + Martel LLP on

It is a basic tenet of trademark law that rights are jurisdictional. Trademark owners only have rights in the mark in the jurisdictions in which they have registered (or, in some cases, used) the mark....more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Lashify v ITC: The Federal Circuit Redefines the Domestic Industry Requirement

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on

The Federal Circuit has overturned the U.S. International Trade Commission’s longstanding interpretation of section 337(a)(3)(B). Complainant Lashify, Inc. appealed an adverse decision by the U.S. International Trade...more

Jones Day

Japanese Supreme Court: Building a System That Includes a Server Located Outside Japan Constitutes Patent Infringement

Jones Day on

On March 3, 2025, the Japanese Supreme Court held that building a network-based system comprised of a server located in the United States, connected via a network to user terminals in Japan, constitutes "producing a product"...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit’s Lashify Decision Expands “Domestic Industry” at the International Trade Commission

Knobbe Martens on

Lashify, Inc. v. International Trade Commission Before: Prost, Taranto, and Chen. Appeal from ITC Investigation. The Federal Circuit expands the economic prong of the domestic-industry analysis to include domestic spending on...more

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

The Precedent: Federal Circuit Emphasizes that Dollar Amount Spent is Not Determinative of § 337’s Domestic Industry Requirement...

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP on

In this edition of The Precedent, we outline the decision in Wuhan Healthgen Biotechnology Corp. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently emphasized that Section 337’s...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Section 337 Now Viable for “Mere Importers” After Federal Circuit’s Lashify Decision

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. on

For years, the U.S. International Trade Commission maintained that the potent remedies available under Section 337 were unavailable to intellectual property owners considered to be nothing more than “mere importers.” That...more

Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.

Federal Circuit Removes Limits on “Qualifying” Domestic Industry Activities at the ITC

Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C. on

On March 5, 2025, the Federal Circuit rejected the ITC’s longstanding practice of excluding certain types of activities from qualifying as “domestic industry” activities under Section 337(a)(3)(B), finding the ITC’s approach...more

Knobbe Martens

[Webinar] ITC Enforcement: Hot Topics In IP Enforcement At The International Trade Commission - July 30th, 10:00am PT

Knobbe Martens on

Please join Attorney Sheila Swaroop, Baraa Kahf, and Jonathan Bachand for a roundtable discussion going over interplay with Patent Office proceedings, use of the pilot program, updates on domestic industry, and the latest on...more

8 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide