The Supreme Court has long held that “[l]aws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas are not patentable” under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Alice Corp. Pty. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 216 (2014) (quoting Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576, 589 (2013)). In Alice, 573 U.S. at 218, and […]
False suggestion of a connection under Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act prohibits registration of “matter which may . . . falsely suggest a connection with persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs or national symbols . . . .” 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a). Although the statutory protection against a false suggestion of a connection is […]
A lawsuit for copyright infringement must be brought “within three years after the claim accrued.” 17 U.S.C. § 507(b). For purposes of this statute of limitations under copyright law, the Ninth Circuit distinguishes between “infringement” claims and “ownership” claims. Unlike infringement claims, “ownership claims accrue only once, at the time ‘when plain and express repudiation […]
To determine whether a likelihood of confusion exists for trademark infringement, the Ninth Circuit applies the multi-factor inquiry articulated in AMF Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1979). But the application of those factors is flexible, and a party need not demonstrate that every factor supports its position to prevail. See Dreamwerks […]
California’s anti-SLAPP statute is “designed to protect defendants from meritless lawsuits that might chill the exercise of their rights to speak and petition on matters of public concern.” Wilson v. Cable News Network, Inc., 7 Cal.5th 871, 883–4 (2019). “Evaluating what qualifies as an issue of ‘public interest’ inherently requires consideration of the public/private distinction, […]