Gibbons Law Alert

Is Lear Still King?

Posted in Patent

On November 13, 2012

In a recent decision, the Second Circuit crowned Lear, Inc. v. Adkins, 395 U.S. 653 (1969), but a petition to the Supreme Court has the possibility of dethroning this ruling and Lear. In Lear, the Court held that a licensee could challenge the validity of patents despite an agreement to the contrary. Contract law, the Court noted, must yield to the public’s interest in ensuring monopolies do not go unchecked. Lear, Inc., 395 U.S. at 670-71. Since that decision, courts have taken varied approaches to Lear. See, e.g., Licensee Patent Validity Challenges Following MedImmune: Implications for Patent Licensing,. 3 HASTINGS SCI. & TECH. L.J. 243-439 (2011).

NLRB Weighs in on Permissible “At-Will” Employment Language

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in Policies and Handbooks

On November 12, 2012

In light of recent guidance by the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”), non-union employers should review the “at-will” language found in their handbooks (and many standalone policies) to make sure it does not constitute an unlawful waiver of an employee’s right to engage in union activity. By now, it should come as no surprise that the Board has an interest in non-union workplaces. From promoting a mandatory workplace posting requirement to challenging seemingly innocuous social media policies, the Board should be on the radar screen for all employers. Most recently, the Board has weighed in on at-will disclaimers found in most handbooks or manuals. Such disclaimers typically explain that the employment relationship is not a contractual one, and the employer or employee can end employment at any time for any reason so long as that reason is not unlawful.

PhRMA Opposes FTC’s Proposed Rules for Reporting Certain Pharmaceutical Licensing Transactions

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in Pharmaceuticals

On November 7, 2012

We recently reported that during the August doldrums the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) proposed for comment amendments to the Hart-Scott-Rodino rules that would require reporting of licensing agreements under which a patent holder grants an “exclusive” license, but retains the limited right to manufacture solely for the recipient of the patent rights, or a right to assist in developing and commercializing the product covered by the patent (“co-rights”) and the value of the license exceeds the HSR minimum (currently $68.2 million).

How Employers Can Combat the Flu

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in Policies and Handbooks

On November 7, 2012

Flu season is here. Even when pandemic levels of the influenza virus are not expected, the flu nevertheless impacts businesses whose employees become ill and/or need to take time off for flu-related reasons. With limited restrictions, employers are permitted to adopt policies and practices to encourage flu prevention, to control workplace flu outbreaks and to maintain optimal efficiency during flu season, provided that their practices are applied consistently, non-discriminatorily and in keeping with published employment policies and handbooks.

Taking Over Former Employee’s LinkedIn Account Not a Violation of Federal Law, According to Pennsylvania District Court

by Gibbons P.C.

Posted in E-Discovery: Legal Decisions and Court Rules / Privacy and Data Security

On November 5, 2012

A Pennsylvania Federal District Court has decided that an employer did not violate the Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) or the Federal Lanham Act, when it took control of a departed employee’s LinkedIn account. The Court ruled that (1) the CFAA, which in part prohibits unauthorized access to a computer with the intent to defraud, did not come into play and (2) no trademark infringement in violation of the Lanham Act had occurred.

Did You Submit an IDS During Reexamination? Does It Matter?

by Christopher H. Strate

Posted in Patent

On November 5, 2012

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit in Belkin Int’l, Inc. v. Kappos, 2012-1090, published an important decision potentially limiting the scope of both ex-parte and inter-partes reexaminations. Traditionally during reexamination, practitioners submit information disclosure statements (IDS) to the Patent Office disclosing patents and printed publications with the understanding that the examiner would consider those references in relation to the claims subject to reexam. Very often, if the references were properly submitted, the examiner would record that the references were considered, but would not apply the references against the claims. The benefit to the patent owner is that this could create a heavy burden for subsequent defendants to show that the claims were invalid in view of this prior art. Belkin v. Kappos may change this practice and understanding.

NJ Supreme Court to Hear Oral Argument on COAH Third Round Affordable Housing Regulations

by Jennifer P. Smith

Posted in Development/Redevelopment

On October 26, 2012

On November 7, 2012, the New Jersey Supreme Court will be hearing oral argument as to whether the latest regulations adopted by the Council on Affordable Housing (“COAH”) are valid. Regardless of how the Supreme Court rules, the decision will have a far-ranging impact on the future of affordable housing in New Jersey and is being watched closely by developers, municipalities and public interest groups.

N.J. Court Finds No “Temporary Taking” During Abandoned Condemnation Proceeding

by Paul M. Hauge

Posted in Development/Redevelopment

On October 25, 2012

A New Jersey Appellate Court ruled against several landowners in Long Branch who sought compensation for losses they allegedly suffered during the pendency of a condemnation action that the city eventually abandoned. In the absence of an actual “declaration of taking,” the Court held in its October 16 opinion, the landowners were not entitled to compensation.

District of New Jersey Stays Pay-For-Delay Cases Pending High Court’s Decision in K-Dur

by Christopher Walsh

Posted in Antitrust / Patent

On October 24, 2012

Defendants in reverse-payment actions pending in the Third Circuit (New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware) take note: in In re Effexor XR Antitrust Litigation the Honorable Joel A. Pisano, U.S.D.J., of the District of New Jersey has stayed several class-action litigations challenging the legality of certain reverse-payment settlement agreements between Wyeth and generic drug manufacturer Teva Pharmaceuticals, pursuant to which Wyeth allegedly paid Teva to delay its marketing of a generic counterpart to Wyeth’s Effexor XR drug.

Tim Tebow Time in the Trademark Office . . . .

by Charles H. Chevalier

Posted in Trademarks

On October 24, 2012

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) recently published for opposition the mark TIM TEBOW. The applicant for the mark in these various goods and services is XV Enterprises LLC of Denver, Colorado, who has indicated that Tim Tebow, the two-time Heisman Trophy winner and New York Jets quarterback (formerly with the Denver Broncos), has consented to the applications.