Intellectual Property Law
New Matter SUMMER 2022, VOLUME 47, EDITION 2
Content
- 2022 New Matter Author Submission Guidelines
- Becoming More Like California? a Potential National Movement Towards Restricting the Use of Non-competes
- Copyright Commons
- Federal Circuit Column
- INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION Executive Committee 2021-2022
- INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION Interest Group Representatives 2021-2022
- Intellectual Property Section New Matter Editorial Board
- Larry G. Junker V. Medical Components, and Martech Medical Products, Inc.
- Letter From the Chair
- Letter From the Editor-in-chief
- My Ai Did It: Intermediary Liability For Ai?
- Ninth Circuit Report
- Online Cle For Participatory Credit
- Quarterly International Ip Law Update
- Russia Permits Uncompensated Use of Certain Patents and Future of Russian Patents
- Table of Contents
- The California Lawyers Association Intellectual Property Alumni
- THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION IN UNICOLORS, INC. V. H&M HENNES & MAURITZ, L.P. ELIMINATES A TRAP FOR UNWARY COPYRIGHT APPLICANTS
- Trade Secret Report
- What's Happening In Russia—Should Ip Rightsholders Be Concerned?
- Ttab Decisions and Developments
TTAB DECISIONS AND DEVELOPMENTS
Jane Shay Wald
Irell & Manella LLP
If You Want To Add Stuff That Took Place After Pleading A Motion To Supplement’s What You Are Needing
If You Want To Plead Things That Pre-Dated Your Filing You Must Move To Amend For The Board To Be Smiling
The Board allowed Opposer to supplement its pleadings to allege later-filed applications and earlier common law rights. "Opposer styles its motion as one for leave to amend under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). However, to the extent Opposer seeks leave to allege ownership of applications filed after the proceeding was instituted, the motion is to supplement the pleading, and accordingly is governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(d)."