CLE Recap: Patents and Trademarks at the Supreme Court

By Joel Tragesser, Quarles & Brady LLP

Mark Janis of the IU Maurer School of Law led two panel discussions on Tuesday, August 4 in Indianapolis. The first hour addressed trademarks and featured Darlene Seymour of Continental Enterprises Inc., Caitlin Brandon of Barnes & Thornburg LLP and Matthew Clark of Meitus Gelbert Rose LLP. Mark provided a background of the opinions in Hana Financial, Inc. v. Hana Bank, which addressed tacking, B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Indus., which addressed issue preclusion. Matthew, Caitlin and Darlene discussed how these cases have affected clients and their practices. Mark ended by providing a preview of potential issues for Supreme Court guidance, such as well known marks doctrine and section 2(a) disparagement.

After a short break to assemble the panel of Arvie Anderson of Eli Lilly & Company, Trevor Carter of Faegre Baker Daniels LLP and Donald Knebel of Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Mark began the second panel discussion by summarizing Octane and Highmark, which addressed fees, Limelight and Commil, which addressed inducement, Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., which addressed claim construction, and Kimble v. Marvel, which addressed post-expiration royalties. Donald, Trevor and Arvie provided their insights on how these opinions altered their handling of cases.

This post was written by Joel Tragesser of Quarles & Brady LLP. If you would like to submit content or write an article for the Intellectual Property Section page, please email Rachel Beachy at rbeachy@indybar.org.