Recently in Infringement Category

Tony Duquette, Inc., as holder of various intellectual property rights associated with the late designer and artist Tony Duquette, has filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against J. Crew Group, Inc. for trademark infringement and other causes of action.

Tony Duquette, Inc. alleges that J. Crew infringed the Duquette proprietary name and trademarks by producing and marketing a "J. Crew Duquette Factory Leopard Print" sweater. The lawsuit alleges that J. Crew knowingly and willfully used the Duquette trademark without permission or license in connection with a leopard print product because of Tony Duquette's unique association with leopard print in the company's designs and products. Tony Duquette, Inc. has an exclusive licensing arrangement with Jim Thomson, Inc. for a collection of woven and printed textiles including an authorized signature leopard print pattern and with Roubini, Inc. for carpets and tapestries in signature leopard print taken from the Duquette archives. Damages and injunctive relief are sought.

Hutton Wilkinson, President and Creative Director of Tony Duquette, Inc., said, "We filed this claim to ensure our trademarks are used appropriately and only with our permission."

SOURCE Tony Duquette, Inc.

If you've ever had the opportunity to meet Steve Martorano, it's an experience you won't soon forget. The same can be said about the experience of dining in his Fort Lauderdale restaurant, Cafe Martorano. That's a fact that hasn't gone unnoticed by other aspiring restaurateurs, which is why there have been numerous attempts over the past 17 years to replicate Steve's success by creating nearly identical restaurant concepts. Steve finally had enough and recently filed a lawsuit with the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island against one particular imitator.

"I may not be able to stop someone from playing the same music we play or serving similar food to what we serve, but I can stop someone from copying every single detail of my restaurant...and certainly for taking credit for creating the concept in the first place," says Steve Martorano. "We deserve credit for creating a first class, world renowned restaurant that is unparalleled in the industry today. That's why we filed this lawsuit."

The lawsuit charges Cafe Longo and proprietor Jerry Longo with intentional trade dress infringement. Longo was once a friend of Steve's who spent many hours in Cafe Martorano. Everything about Cafe Longo is redolent of Cafe Martorano, from identical menu items and old family recipes, to identical music and movie selections. Longo has even been quoted by journalists as having developed the original concept for his restaurant at Cafe Martorano in Fort Lauderdale.

It's not surprising that more than one person has tried to copy Steve's concept over the years. Steve does seem to have a magic touch. It can take months to get a table at any one of his three restaurant locations. In addition to a dedicated local following, Steve's restaurants are consistently patronized by the biggest names in the entertainment and sports world. Cafe Martorano has received national and worldwide recognition. Steve also has a successful retail line of pasta sauces, recently published a new autobiography, and has other licensing opportunities and partnerships in the works.

What's the secret to Cafe Martorano's success? It's the man himself.

"The magic behind Cafe Martorano is all about Steve," says Thomas Angelo, attorney for Cafe Martorano and Steve's long time friend. "Steve has created a concept that is a combination of exceptional food and distinctive ambiance. When you mix those two things with his passion for the business, you get a unique restaurant unlike anything else."

Steve got his humble beginnings as a club DJ in the '70s. He then opened a one-man sandwich delivery business that he ran out of his apartment. His food became so popular in South Philadelphia that he expanded it to a take-out restaurant in a strip mall, then to a larger sit-down restaurant. Finally, in 1993, Steve opened Cafe Martorano in its current Fort Lauderdale location. And, as they say, the rest is history.

"We couldn't be prouder of what we've been able to create at Cafe Martorano," adds Steve. "I want to make sure that everyone out there knows that we're the one and only. We like to call it, 'The Real Deal, Philly Style.'"

Sherri Hill, distinguished and successful designer of high quality prom dresses and evening gowns, and Sherri Hill, Inc., have sued Let's Fashion, Inc., a Los Angeles-based manufacturer and wholesaler, for knocking off distinctive elements of nine of Sherri Hill's well-known dresses.  Let's Fashion is accused of distributing the infringing dresses to boutiques and retailers for sale to customers.  Widely acclaimed for her achievements in the pageant industry, Sherri Hill has designed gowns that have been worn with success by pageant winners and contestants including recent winners of the Miss USA® and Miss America® pageants.  Her stylish prom dresses have become instant hits, and are sold through hundreds of reputable retailers throughout the world.

The lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles federal court by the New York-based brand protection law firm Gioconda Law Group PLLC, accuses Let's Fashion of copyright and trade dress infringement, unfair competition, as well as misappropriation of Sherri Hill's name under California law.  The Complaint specifically alleges that Let's Fashion has copied numerous distinctive and copyrighted bead and embroidery designs owned by Sherri Hill, and that employees at Let's Fashion are specifically describing them as Sherri Hill designs.  

According to papers filed in court, the lineup of infringing dresses that appear in the current Let's Fashion product catalog "illustrates the great extent to which the design elements on Let's Fashion's dresses are copies of Sherri Hill's legally protected design elements."  Approximately ninety percent of Let's Fashion's production is domestically produced and sewn in Los Angeles, but some of the more elaborate knockoffs are allegedly made in China.  In addition to a product recall, Sherri Hill is seeking unspecified damages, an injunction, corrective advertising, as well as a list of those retailers who are selling the infringing Let's Fashion dresses to consumers.

The Gioconda Law Group PLLC, One Penn Plaza, 36th Floor, Fashion Avenue and West 34th Street, New York, NY 10119, Tel: (212) 786-7549, Fax: (888) 697-9665, www.GiocondaLaw.com.

SOURCE The Gioconda Law Group PLLC

LORD Corporation -- a leader in vibration and motion control products and solutions for defense, aerospace and commercial markets -- filed suit in 2009 against Active Shock (recently acquired by General Kinetics Engineering Corporation) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina (civil action number 5:09-CV-00318).  In this suit, LORD Corporation asserts certain patent infringement and false advertising as well as unfair and deceptive trade practices claims.  

Specifically, LORD Corporation claims infringement of its three U.S. patents entitled:  "Vibration Attenuating Method Utilizing Continuously Variable Semiactive Damper,"  "End Stop Control Method," and "System for Reducing Suspension End Stop Collisions."  LORD Corporation has taken this action to protect its intellectual property for these high-value, enabling technologies and to ensure that LORD Magneto-Rheological (MR) and adaptive suspension technology is accurately represented to customers.  

LORD Corporation's MR and adaptive suspension technology has been thoroughly proven through the licensing and broad intellectual property portfolio used in developing Delphi's MagneRide™ suspension system (now part of BWI Group).  First introduced on the 2002 Corvette, more than 500,000 devices appear in more than a dozen models from a wide range of manufacturers including Audi, Acura, Ferrari, GM, Holden and Honda.  The rapid acceptance of the technology by a wide range of manufacturers, from high-performance sports cars to SUVs, demonstrates the confidence the automotive industry has in the performance, reliability and durability of LORD technology.

LORD MR technology is based on commercial proprietary and patented fluid, damper, mount, brake and clutch designs and sophisticated computer control algorithms. When exposed to a magnetic field, MR materials change state nearly instantaneously and with complete reversibility. As a result, MR technology provides fast and infinitely variable control of energy dissipation for industrial and automotive devices. As the only provider of commercial MR fluids with more than 110 MR fluid, device, and controller algorithm patents worldwide, LORD is the largest manufacturer of MR devices and systems.  For information about LORD MR applications, visit www.lord.com/mr.

With headquarters in Cary, N.C., USA, and sales in excess of  $700-MM, LORD Corporation is a privately-held company that designs, manufactures and markets devices and systems to manage mechanical motion and control noise and vibration; formulates, produces and sells general purpose and specialty adhesives and coatings; and develops products and systems utilizing magnetically responsive technologies. With manufacturing in nine countries and offices in more than 15 major business centers, LORD Corporation employs more than 2,500 worldwide. Visit www.lord.com for more information.  

SunPower Corp. (Nasdaq: SPWRA, SPWRB) and SunLink Corporation today announced the two companies have settled a patent infringement case brought by SunPower before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. SunPower brought the lawsuit against SunLink in February 2008 asserting infringement of SunPower's patent rights covering its lightweight rooftop mounting products, SunPower® PowerGuard® and the SunPower® T10 Solar Roof Tile.

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the specifics of which are confidential, SunLink has acknowledged the infringement of SunLink's MMS rooftop solar product as well as the validity and enforceability of SunPower's patent rights. For confidential consideration provided under the settlement, SunLink has received a license to SunPower's infringed patents.

"SunPower has a long history of developing industry-leading technology and we will take actions necessary to protect and enforce our intellectual property rights," said SunPower CEO Tom Werner. "We are glad to achieve a resolution to this lawsuit consistent with this objective."

"We are happy to bring this litigation to a close with an agreement that is not only beneficial to both parties, but also protects our current and future customers," said SunLink CEO Christopher Tilley. "With these licenses, we continue to add to SunLink's IP portfolio and are looking forward to introducing new, innovative photovoltaic mounting solutions to the market soon."

SunPower holds more than 120 patents for its innovative solar technology, including the world's most efficient solar cell and the recently launched SunPower® T5 Solar Roof Tile.

About SunPower

Founded in 1985, SunPower Corp. (Nasdaq: SPWRA, SPWRB) designs, manufactures and delivers the planet's most powerful solar technology broadly available today. Residential, business, government and utility customers rely on the company's experience and proven results to maximize return on investment. With headquarters in San Jose, Calif., SunPower has offices in North America, Europe, Australia and Asia. For more information, visit www.sunpowercorp.com.

About SunLink

SunLink Inc, based in San Rafael, CA, offers the solar industry's most comprehensive, highly engineered solar module mounting solutions. The company designs and manufactures rooftop and ground mounted systems for commercial and utility-scale installations, supporting modules from nearly every photovoltaic manufacturer. SunLink has been the chosen solution on more than 60 MW of projects spanning over 400 sites across North America. For more information about SunLink's history, product lines or engineering services, visit www.sunlink.com.

SOURCE SunPower Corp.

There has been significant public interest and media coverage around this case over the last few days. For legal reasons, Nude has been unable to comment or make any statement until today.

Nude was founded by Bryan Meehan and Ali Hewson. Bryan originally co-founded Fresh & Wild, the UK's largest chain of Natural and Organic stores. Nude was created as a pioneering natural skincare range and is known for its innovative use of pre and probiotics.

Nude applied for and successfully registered the pan-European Community Trademark (CTM) for the word 'Nude' to be used as a trade mark specifically for perfumery and skincare, as well as for other products.

In May 2008, when asked for permission to use the trade mark 'Nude' for a Stella McCartney perfume, Nude - though great admirers of Stella McCartney - respectfully refused as a Nude scent is forthcoming..

Nude considers the launch of 'Stella Nude' by L'Oreal to be a clear infringement of Nude's trade mark. To protect their brand, Nude was forced to take the matter to the English High Court.

On August 20(th), the High Court confirmed that Nude has a clearly arguable claim of trade mark infringement against the Stella Nude perfume. The Judge also rejected L'Oreal's arguments that Nude's trade mark in relation to perfume was obviously invalid saying he was not convinced 'Nude' was descriptive of perfume. Nude was not granted an interim injunction to prevent the launch of Stella Nude because of the harm that would cause to L'Oreal due to the imminent launch, but the Judge concluded that whilst Nude "may ultimately prevail at the trial, it seems to me that an injunction and damages at that stage, though far from perfect as remedies, are more likely to be able to restore [Nude] to their rightful position".

A trial of Nude's claim will take place next year.

Source: Nude Skincare

Smith & Nephew Inc's Advanced Wound Management division (LSE: SN; NYSE: SNN) announced that the German District Court in Dusseldorf decided in favour of Smith & Nephew by rejecting a request from Kinetic Concepts, Inc (NYSE: KCI) for a Preliminary Injunction against the marketing of Smith & Nephew's RENASYS* EZ Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) pump in Germany based on alleged infringement of the KCI patent EP0777504.

The District Court decision allows for Smith & Nephew to continue to commercialize its RENASYSEZNPWT product portfolio in Germany.

"This win in favor of Smith & Nephew allows us to continue providing wound care professionals in Germany with options for the latest innovations for NPWT," said Robin Carlstein, Senior Vice President of Advanced Wound Devices at Smith & Nephew. "Clearly, we are pleased with the German District Court's findings in this matter and look forward to continuing to provide our customers with our full range of RENASYS NPWT products in a very important market for the company."

For more information regarding Smith & Nephew, please visit our Web site at http://www.smith-nephew.com.

About Smith & Nephew

Smith & Nephew is a global medical technology business, specializing in Orthopaedics, including Reconstruction, Trauma and Clinical Therapies, Endoscopy and Advanced Wound Management. Smith & Nephew is a global leader in arthroscopy and advanced wound management and is one of the leading global orthopaedics companies.

Smith & Nephew is dedicated to helping improve people's lives. The Company prides itself on the strength of its relationships with its surgeons and professional healthcare customers, with whom its name is synonymous with high standards of performance, innovation and trust. The Company operates in 32 countries around the world. Annual sales in 2008 were nearly $3.8 billion.

SOURCE Smith & Nephew Inc

Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in favor of The Procter & Gamble Company (P&G) in the patent infringement lawsuit filed by P&G against Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. The positive ruling protects P&G's rights in the U.S. to exclusively market the osteoporosis therapy Actonel(R) (risedronate sodium) tablets. Actonel is commercialized through a collaboration between Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals and sanofi-aventis.

On August 13, 2004, P&G filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Teva to enforce P&G's U.S. composition of matter patent for risedronate, the active ingredient in Actonel. Teva sought to market a generic version of Actonel in the United States under the assertion that the Actonel patent was not valid due to obviousness of the invention. On February 28, 2008, the Court ruled in favor of P&G, expressly rejecting Teva's validity challenge. Shortly afterwards, Teva filed an appeal of the decision. Oral arguments for the appeal were heard in December, 2008.

"We are very pleased and not surprised that the Court recognized and acknowledged the uniqueness of the risedronate molecule," said Tom Finn, P&G President, Global Health Care. "P&G pioneered the use of bisphosphonates in humans almost 30 years ago. We specifically selected Actonel for development versus a stable of many other bisphosphonates because our extensive R&D efforts suggested Actonel had many important, distinguishing characteristics including its potency and favorable safety profile. We will continue to invest in Actonel and continue to pursue development of future Actonel initiatives in the years to come."

The Actonel patent life extends through June 2014, including a pediatric extension, which was granted last month. Actonel was approved in 2000 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Actonel is the only oral monthly postmenopausal osteoporosis therapy approved to reduce the risk of both spine and non-spine fractures (non-spine fractures were measured as a group, not separately).

SOURCE The Procter & Gamble Company