“Foreign laws that block the production of discoverable material do not automatically excuse a party from its Rule 26 obligations.” Philips Medical Systems (Cleveland), Inc. v. Buan, No. 19 CV 2648, 2022 WL 602485, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 1, 2022); see also Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for S. Dist. of […]
In determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion between trademarks, two key factors are the similarity or dissimilarity of the marks and the goods or services. Federated Foods, Inc. v. Fort Howard Paper Co., 544 F.2d 1098, 192 USPQ 24, 29 (CCPA 1976); In re E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 476 F.2d […]
The “ordinary observer” test for design-patent infringement is as follows: [I]f, in the eye of an ordinary observer, giving such attention as a purchaser usually gives, two designs are substantially the same, if the resemblance is such as to deceive such an observer, inducing him to purchase one supposing it to be the other, the […]
By definition, a trade secret is any valuable business information which is not widely known and must be protected to preserve its confidentiality. In business, trade secrets often create a competitive advantage. Unlike copyrights, trademarks, or patents, which are disclosed to the general public as a condition for protection, a trade secret can put the […]
A preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy that requires showing: a likelihood of success on the merits; irreparable injury if the injunction is denied; the threatened injury outweighs the injury the injunction would cause the party to be enjoined; and the injunction would not adversely affect the public interest. See Beltronics USA, Inc. v. Midwest […]