Burdens of Discovery for Scientific Working Materials and Deliberative Documents

Written by: Evelyn Y. Chang
Edited by: Jessica Vosgerchian

In March of 2012, British Petroleum sought court enforcement of a subpoena for “any conversation or discussion” made by researchers from WHOI regarding their studies on the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The court applied a balancing test that weighed BP’s need for the requested information against the burden placed on WHOI, and required the WHOI researchers disclose internal pre-publication materials relating to the studies cited in the government report.

District Court Grants Summary Judgment to YouTube in Viacom v. YouTube (Again)

Viacom Int’l Inc. v. YouTube, Inc.
By Pio Szamel – Edited by Laura Fishwick

On April 18, 2013 the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York once again granted summary judgment for YouTube in Viacom Int’l Inc. v. YouTube, Inc., on remand from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Louis L. Stanton held that YouTube did not have any actual knowledge of any specific infringements of the Viacom content in suit, nor was it willfully blind to any such specific infringements.

Federal Circuit Finds Bayer’s Yaz Birth Control Patent Invalid for Obviousness

Bayer Healthcare Pharm., Inc. v. Watson Pharm., Inc.
By Erica Larson – Edited by Suzanne Van Arsdale

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the judgment of the Nevada District Court, which ruled that claims 13 and 15 of Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Bayer Schering Pharma AG (“Bayer”) U.S. Patent RE37,564 were not invalid for obviousness. The patent claimed a combination of synthetic hormones and dosing regimens used by Bayer in the Yaz birth control pill.

Flash Digest: News in Brief

By Ron Gonski

House Passes CISPA

Federal Circuit Renews K-Tech Communications Lawsuit Against DirecTV

Government Squashes Dozens of Patents a Year for National Security Reasons

Facebook to Face Jury Trial over “Timeline” Trademark

Timelines, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc.
By Ashish Bakshi – Edited by Dorothy Du

Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”) lost its bid for a quick end to a trademark infringement suit filed by Timelines, Inc. (“Timelines”) over the social networking giant’s use of the term “timeline.” The court held that Facebook failed to show as a matter of law that Timelines’ trademark for “timeline” was generic or merely descriptive or, if the trademark were valid, that  Facebook’s use of the term constituted fair use. A jury trial will commence on April 22.