#DistrictCourtOfAmazon

0 message0 participant0 message aujourd’hui

Sarah FackrellPeritas Brands v. Leaphigh Animals - Judge dismisses patent owner's motion to dismiss the patent claims, based on a covenant not to sue:<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nvd.161575/gov.uscourts.nvd.161575.86.0.pdf" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nvd.161575/gov.uscourts.nvd.161575.86.0.pdf</a>But I'm most interested in this description of what happened at Amazon. I wasn't aware Amazon did these kind of immediate takedowns for patents; I thought you had to do arbitration (APEX)? Has that changed? Was my understanding mistaken? Is the record here just incorrect? <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/PatentFedi" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#PatentFedi</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/DistrictCourtOfAmazon" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#DistrictCourtOfAmazon</a>

Sarah FackrellWenzhouFuruisi v. Xing - New declaratory judgment case over allegedly wrongful Amazon takedowns: <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/704655616/WenzhouFuruisi-v-Xing-Complaint" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://www.scribd.com/document/704655616/WenzhouFuruisi-v-Xing-Complaint</a>There are a number of accused products. One of the infringement claims might have been colorable (but looks like it should probably lose on the merits). This one, however, is absolutely ridiculous.<a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/DesignPatents" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#DesignPatents</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/DistrictCourtOfAmazon" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#DistrictCourtOfAmazon</a>

Sarah FackrellRockbros v. Shehadeh - New declaratory judgment action seeks (among other things) declaratory judgment of design patent invalidity after an Amazon IP dispute:<a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/696101486/Rockbros-v-Shehadeh-Complaint" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://www.scribd.com/document/696101486/Rockbros-v-Shehadeh-Complaint</a>The patent has an effective filing date in 2013. According to the defendant (accused infringer), the defendant (patent owner) told Amazon that the accused product is an "exact duplicate" of a product the plaintiff has been selling since 2008.<a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/DeisgnPatents" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#DeisgnPatents</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/DistrictCourtOfAmazon" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#DistrictCourtOfAmazon</a>

Sarah FackrellLots of interesting things going on in this new declaratory judgment complaint, which alleges wrongful use of the Amazon takedown process: <a href="https://design-law.tumblr.com/post/732248452264820736/does-this-glove-anticipate-this-design-patent" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://design-law.tumblr.com/post/732248452264820736/does-this-glove-anticipate-this-design-patent</a>Complaint: <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.insd.210681/gov.uscourts.insd.210681.1.0.pdf" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.insd.210681/gov.uscourts.insd.210681.1.0.pdf</a>Docket: <a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67912135/excelnecia-importing-pty-ltd-dba-kennels-kats-v-leng/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" translate="no" target="_blank">https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67912135/excelnecia-importing-pty-ltd-dba-kennels-kats-v-leng/</a><a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/DesignPatents" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#DesignPatents</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/DistrictCourtOfAmazon" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#DistrictCourtOfAmazon</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/Remedies" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#Remedies</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/PersonalJurisdiction" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#PersonalJurisdiction</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/CivProMatters" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#CivProMatters</a>

Sarah FackrellShenzhen Root Technology Co., Ltd. v. Chiaro Technology, Ltd. - Another case seeking declaratory judgment based on an allegedly wrongful Amazon takedown: <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.321565/gov.uscourts.wawd.321565.1.0.pdf" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.321565/gov.uscourts.wawd.321565.1.0.pdf</a>Among other things, the plaintiff claims that the defendant made improper use of Amazon Patent Evaluation Express (“APEX”) process.<a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/UtilityPatents" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#UtilityPatents</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/APEX" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#APEX</a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/DistrictCourtOfAmazon" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#DistrictCourtOfAmazon</a>

Recherches récentes

Options de recherche

Administré par :

Statistiques du serveur :

#districtcourtofamazon