SIMULATION MATERIALS FOR MAY 2017 PROGRAM
1. Claim Construction (“Markman”) Simulation: Mangosoft v. Oracle
2. Copyright Simulation: Bratz
3. Trademark Preliminary Injunction Simulation: Polar Shock
4. Trademark Preliminary Injunction Simulation: Swerve
PATENT LAW
1. Subject Matter
Software and Business Methods
– Bilski v. Kappos, 130 S.Ct. 3218 (2010)
– Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, Int’l, 134 S.Ct. 2347 (2014)
Bioscience/technology
– Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 132 S.Ct. 1289 (2012)
– Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 (1980)
2. Utility
– Brenner v. Manson, 383 U.S. 519 (1966)
– In re Fisher, 421 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (DNA express sequence tags)
3. Novelty
– Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharm., 339 F.3d 1373 (Fed.Cir. 2003) (Inherency)
4. Non-Obviousness
– Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 816 F.3d 788 (Fed. Cir. 2016)
– KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007)
5. Written Description/Indefiniteness
– Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 792 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (en banc) (means+function)
– Nautilus v. Biosig Instruments, 134 S.Ct. 2120 (2014)
– Johnson & Johnston Associates Inc. v. R.E. Service Co., Inc, 285 F.3d 1046 (Fed. Cir. 2002)
– Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Co., 598 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2010)
B. Infringement
“Within the United States”
– NTP v. Research in Motion, 392 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2004)
Doctrine of Equivalents
Prosecution History Estoppel
– Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., Ltd. (on remand from Supreme Court)
Divided/Joint Infringement
– Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., 797 F.3d 1020 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (en banc)
– Limelight Networks v. Akamai Technologies, 134 S.Ct. 2111 (2014)
Indirect Liability
– Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A.,131 S.Ct. 2060 (2011)
Injunctions
– eBay v. MercExchange, 126 S.Ct. 1837 (2006)
E. Damages
– Summit 6, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., 802 F.3d 1283 (Fed. Cir. 2015)
– Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Sys., 773 F.3d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2014)
– Apple Inc. v. Motorola, Inc. 757 F.3d 1286 (Fed. Cir. 2014)
– Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 2013 WL 2111217 (W.D. Wash. 2013)
– LaserDynamics, Inc. v. Quanta Computer, Inc., 694 F.3d 51 (Fed. Cir. 2012)
– Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 632 F.3d 1292 (Fed. Cir. 2011)
– ResQNet.com, Inc. v. Lansa, Inc., 594 F.3d 860 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (per curiam)
– Cornell Univ. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 609 F. Supp. 2d 279 (N.D.N.Y. 2009) (Rader, J., sitting by designation)
– Lucent Techs., Inc. v. Gateway, Inc., 580 F.3d 1301 (Fed. Cir. 2009)
– Garretson v. Clark, 111 U.S. 120 (1884)
Extraterritorial Damages
– Microsoft v. AT&T, 550 U.S. 437 (2007)
Enhanced Damages
– In re Seagate Technology, LLC, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (en banc)
DESIGN PATENT
Infringement
– Egyptian Goddess, Inc. v. Swisa, Inc., 543 F.3d 665(Fed. Cir. 2008) (enbanc)
Damages
– Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Inc., 137 S.Ct. 429 (2016)
PATENT CASE MANAGEMENT
– James Ware & Brian Davy, The History, Content, Application and Influence of the Northern District of California’s Patent Local Rules, 25 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech. L.J. 965 (2009)
– Patent Case Management Judicial Guide (3rd ed forthcoming 2016) Appendix D (draft)
B. Protective Orders and Discovery
– Stipulated Protective Order, Northern District of California
– eDiscovery Model Order
C. Model Jury Instructions
– Patent Case Management Judicial Guide (3rd ed. forthcoming 2016) Appendix E (draft)
D. Claim Construction (Process and Principal Issues)
– J. Jonas Anderson and Peter S. Menell, Restoring the Fact/Law Distinction in Patent Claim Construction, 109 NW L. Rev. Online 187 (2015)
– Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005)
– Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370 (1996)
– Fed.R. Civ.P. 53 (special masters)
– FRE 706 (court appointed experts)
– TechSearch v. Intel, 286 F3d. 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2002)
– Association of Mexican Am. Educators v. California, 231 F3d. 572 (9th Cir. 2000)
COPYRIGHT LAW
A. Protectability, Ownership, and Duration
1. Useful Article Doctrine
– Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., 137 S.Ct. 1002 (2017)
B. Infringement Analysis
– Arnstein v. Porter, 154 F.2d 464 (2d Cir. 1946)
– Nichols v. Universal Pictures Corporation, 45 F.2d 119 (2d Cir. 1930)
1. Music
– Three Boys Music Corporation v. Michael Bolton, 212 F.3d 477 (9th Cir. 2000)
– Swirsky v. Carey, 376 F.3d 841 (9th Cir. 2004)
– Selle v. Gibb, 741 F.2d 896 (7th Cir. 1984)
– Bright Tunes Music Corp. v. Harrisongs Music, Ltd., 420 F.Supp. 177 (S.D.N.Y. 1976)
2. Software
– Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc., 750 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2014)
– Lotus v. Borland, 49 F.3d 807 (1st Cir. 1995), aff’d by an equally divided Court, 516 U.S. 233 (1996)
– Computer Associates v. Altai, 982 F.2d 693 (2d Cir. 1992)
C. Fair Use
– Pierre Leval, Toward a Fair Use Standard, 103 Harv. L. Rev. 1105 (1990)
– David Nimmer, “Fairest of them All” and Other Fairy Tales of Fair Use,66 Law & Contemp.Probs. 263 (Winter/Spring 2003)
1. Parody
– Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994)
2. Software – Reverse Engineering
– Sega Enterprises Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc., 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992)
3. Transformative
– Authors Guild v. Google, 804 F.3d 202 (2d Cir. 2015)
– Cariou v. Prince, 714 3d 694 (2d Cir. 2013)
– Blanch v. Koons, 467 F.3d 244 (2d Cir. 2006)
– Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley Ltd., 448 F.3d 605 (2d Cir. 2006)
– Salinger v. Colting, 607 F.3d 68 (2d Cir. 2010)
– UMG Recordings, Inc. v. MP3.Com, Inc., 2000 WL 1262568
DIGITAL COPYRIGHT LAW
– Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc. v. Grokster Ltd., 545 U.S. 913 (2005)
– Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, 464 U.S. 417 (1984)
B. DMCA
– Online Service Provider Safe Harbors and Copyright Enforcement
1. Scope Online Service Provider Safe Harbor and General Immunity for Passive Conduits
– UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Shelter Capital Partners LLC, 718 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2013)
– Viacom Int’l, Inc. v. YouTube, 679 F.3d 19 (2d Cr. 2012)
– CoStar Group v. LoopNet, 373 F.3d 544 (4th Cir. 2004) (continued viability of immunity of passive conduits)
2. Notice and Takedown Process
– Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., 815 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir. 2016)
– Corbis Corp. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 351 F. Supp. 2d 1090 (W.D. Wash. 2004) (identifying and terminating repeat infringers)
– Rossi v. Motion Picture Ass’n of America, 391 F.3d 1000 (9th Cir. 2004) (knowledge required to trigger DMCA takedown requirements)
3. Subpoenas to OSPs
– Matthew Sag, Copyright Trolling, An Empirical Study, 100 Iowa L. Rev. 1105 (2015)
– London-Sire Records, Inc. v. Doe 1, 542 F.Supp.2d 153 (D.Mass 2008)
– RIAA v. Verizon Communications, 351 F.3d 1229 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (holding that DMCA Section 512(h) subpoena provision applies only to Section 512(c) on-line service providers and cannot be used to identify filesharers’ identity)
– In re Charter Communications, Inc. Subpoena Enforcement Matter, 393 F.3d 771 (8th Cir. 2005) (same) In re Subpoena to University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2005 WL 1027099 (M.D.N.C. April 14, 2005) (same)
– Sony Ent. Corp. v. Does 1-40, 326 F. Supp. 2d 556 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (addressing procedural issues relating to Doe filesharing lawsuits; holding that First Amendment did not bar ISP’s disclosure of defendants’ identities)
– Elektra Ent. Group v. Does 1-9, 2004 WL 2095581 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (granting motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction when the copyright owner has not filed suit in a jurisdiction with which a particular Doe has minimum contacts)
– BMG v. John Does 1-203, 2004 WL 953888 (E.D. Pa. 2004) (declining to consolidate filesharing cases)
– Virgin Records America, Inc., v. John Does 1-35, 2006 WL 1028956 (D.D.C. Apr. 18, 2006)
4. P2P Enforcement – “Making Available”
– Copyright Office Making Available Study (2016)
– Peter S. Menell, In Search of Copyright’s Lost Ark: Interpreting the Right to Distribute in the Internet Age, 59 J. Copyright Soc’y 1 (2011)
– Matthew Sag, Copyright Trolling, An Empirical Study
5. Public Performance
– American Broadcasting Companies v. AEREO, 134 S.Ct. 2498 (2014)
– Cartoon Network LP, LLLP v. CSC Holdings, Inc., 536 F.3d 121 (2d Cir.2008) (Cablevision)
C. DMCA – Anticircumvention
– David Nimmer, A Riff on Fair Use in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 148 U. Pa. L. Rev. 673 (2000)
– Lexmark v. Static Control Components, 387 F.3d 522 (6th Cir. 2004) (interaction with copyright law’s protectability doctrines)
– Chamberlain Group, Inc. v. Skylink Technologies, 381 F.3d 1178 (Fed. Cir. 2004)
– Davidson & Associates v. Jung, 422 F.3d 630 (8th Cir. 2005)
TRADEMARK LAW
A. Protection Distinctivenes
– Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Samara Bros., Inc. 529 U.S. 205 (2000) (trade dress)
B. Infringement Right of Attribution
– Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 539 U.S. 23 (2003)
C. Defenses Functionality
– TrafFix Devices, Inc. v. Marketing Displays, Inc.
– Christian Louboutin S.A. v. Yves Saint Laurent America Holdings, Inc., 696 F.3d 206 (2d Cir. 2012)
D. Fair Use
– KP Permanent Make-Up, Inc. v. Lasting Impression I, Inc., 125 S.Ct. 542 (2004)|
– Brown v. Electronic Arts, Inc., 724 F.3d 1235 (9th Cir. 2013)
– Century 21 Estate Corp. v. LendingTree, Inc., 425 F.3d 211 (3rd Cir. 2006)
– New Kids on the Block v. News America Pub., Inc., 971 F.2d 302 (9th Cir. 1992)
E. Remedies
Preliminary Injunction
– Herb Reed Enterprises, LLC v. Florida Entertainment Management, Inc. 736 F.3d 1239 (9th Cir. 2013)
F. Dilution
– Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006
– Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC, 507 F.3d 252 (4th Cir. 2007)
DIGITAL TM LAW
A. Domain Names
– Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (August 26, 2001)
B. Keyword Advertising
– Multi Time Machine, Inc. v. Amazon.com, 804 F.3d 930 (9th Cir. 2015)
– Rosetta Stone Ltd. v. Google, Inc., 676 F.3d 144 (4th Cir. 2012)
– Rescuecom Corp. v. Google Inc., 562 F.3d 123 (2d Cir. 2009)
C. Contributory Infringement
– Tiffany (NJ) Inc. v. eBay Inc., 600 F.3d 93 (2d Cir. 2010)
D. Defenses: Nominative Use, Fair Use, 1st Amendment
– Bally Total Fitness Holding Corp. v. Faber, 29 F.Supp.2d 1161 (C.D.Cal.1998)
– Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Welles, 279 F.3d 796 (9th Cir. 2002)
– Bosley Medical Institute, Inc. v. Kremer, 403 F.3d 672 (9th Cir. 2005)
TRADE SECRETS LAW
– Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016
– Peter S. Menell, Tailoring a Public Policy Exception to Trade Secret Law, 105 Cal. L. Rev. 1 (2017)
– Peter S. Menell, Misconstruing Whistleblower Immunity Under the Defend Trade Secrets Act, 1 Nev. L.J. Forum 92 (2017)