Recently in Intellectual Property Law Category

District court order denying defendant's motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings involving claims of patent and trade dress infringement is reversed where: 1) the Federal Circuit does not have exclusive jurisdiction over the appeal as the court's order was neither final nor injunctive, and the present court has jurisdiction pursuant to 9 U.S.C. sec. 16(a)(1); and 2) the court erred in denying the motion as the dispute fell within the broad language of one of the arbitration provisions of the parties' agreement.    

Read Industrial Wire Products, Inc. v. Costco Wholesale Corp., No. 08-3189

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.
Submitted: April 15, 2009
Filed: August 6, 2009

Judges
Before RILEY, BENTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by SHEPHERD, Circuit Judge

In an action for breach of fiduciary duties, copyright infringement and other claims, district court judgment is affirmed where: 1) the court properly denied of plaintiff's motion for a new trial on its breach of fiduciary duties and misappropriation of trade secrets claims as the jury could have concluded that defendants' conduct did not proximately cause plaintiff to lose the customers' business; 2) the court did not erroneously deny plaintiff's motion for a new trial on the conspiracy claim as there was sufficient evidence to support the jury findings that accounting defendants and banking defendants did not conspire with the former employees; 3) jury instructions on the conspiracy claim were not erroneous; 4) the court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff's motion for a new trial on its aiding and abetting claims as the evidence was sufficient for the jury to conclude the defendants did not know the employees' conduct was improper; 5) the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff's unjust enrichment claim; and 6) the court did not err dismissing defendant's counterclaim that he was improperly denied a bonus.   

Read PFS Distribution Co. v. Raduechel, No. 08-1701

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.
Submitted: April 15, 2009
Filed: July 28, 2009

Judges
Before WOLLMAN, BYE, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by Riley, Circuit Judge.

In a trademark infringement action, district court's dismissal on summary judgment of plaintiff's action on grounds the suit is barred by the equitable doctrine of laches is reversed and remanded where: 1) the court abused its discretion in concluding the doctrine of progressive encroachment applied as plaintiff did not yet have an actionable claim in 1995; 2) defendant was or should have been on notice that plaintiff objected to the use of the mark; and 3) defendant did not show undue prejudicial reliance. 

Read Roederer v. J. Garcia Carrion, S.A., No. 08-2907

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.
Submitted: March 10, 2009
Filed: June 24, 2009

Judges
Before: MURPHY, MELLOY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by SHEPHERD, Circuit Judge.

In a trademark infringement action, district court's dismissal of plaintiff's action is reversed and remanded where the court erred in finding that the prior litigation between the parties collaterally estopped the current trademark infringement action, as the jury in that case had not addressed the likelihood of confusion between the parties' marks.

Read B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc., No. 07-3866.

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Submitted: September 25, 2008
Filed: June 22, 2009

Judges
Before BYE, BEAM, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by SHEPHERD, Circuit Judge.