Norton on Insurance Coverage in Pennsylvania, 2nd Edition (PBI Press)

4710 U.S. Steel Tower
600 Grant Street
Pittsburgh, PA 15219-2702

Phone: 412-288-4000
Fax: 412-288-2405
Email

Latest Business and Legal News

These news items and case summaries are a service provided by FindLaw. Picadio Sneath Miller & Norton, P.C. does not endorse any service or product advertised or discussed in any of these items.

Business

[09/02] American Eagle key revenue figure rises 1 percent

Intellectual Property

[08/26] Patent dispute spins around Cedar Fair's new ride

Insurance

[09/02] SIR Anticipates Record-Breaking Annual Conference

Environment

[09/02] UN: Climate funds shouldn't divert poverty aid

More...

Case Summaries

Intellectual Property

[09/02] Bodum USA, Inc. v. La Cafetiere, Inc.
In a suit for common law trade dress of a French-press coffee maker known as the Chambord, district court's judgment in favor of the defendant is affirmed as, Article 4 of the parties' contract is clear and precise as it allows defendant to sell the coffee maker design anywhere except France - provided that it does not use the Chambord or Melior names and does not use plaintiff's supply channels for four years.

More...

[09/01] Eli Lilly & Co. v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc.
In a patent infringement suit related to a drug for postmenopausal osteoporosis, judgment of the district court is affirmed where: 1) the record amply supports the district court's conclusion that the ordinary artisan would not have considered it obvious to use raloxifene to treat postmenopausal osteoporosis; 2) because the district court's conclusion that the Bone Loss Patents would not have been obvious, its conclusion as to the Low Dose Patent is affirmed as well; 3) district court did not err in concluding that the Bone Loss Patents and the Low Dose Patents were not invalid for lack of enablement; 4) the district court did not clearly err in invalidating the asserted claims of the Particle Size Patents for lack of written description.

More...

Insurance Law

[09/02] Travelers Prop. Cas. Ins. Co. of Am. v. Nat'l. Union Ins. Co.
In an action by one insurer against another seeking $10 million in subrogation proceeds, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed in part where plaintiff waived certain rights by refusing repeated invitations to participate in subrogation discussions. However, the judgment is reversed in part where, as the excess insurer, plaintiff was entitled to a priority interest in the subrogation proceeds representing insured losses.

More...

[09/01] Sprinkles v. Associated Indem. Corp.
In plaintiffs' bad faith action against Fireman's Fund Insurance Company, arising from an underlying suit against defendant and his employer for causing the death of plaintiffs' father in an automobile accident, trial court's judgment sustaining the insurer's demurrer is affirmed as, under the complaint and matters judicially noticed, the defendant-employee was an insured, rendering the automobile exclusion in the GCL policy applicable, and Fireman's Fund had no duty to defend the employer.

More...

Environmental Law

[09/01] Western Watersheds Project v. Kraayenbrink
In a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) challenge to eighteen amendments to the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) grazing regulations, partial summary judgment for plaintiffs is affirmed in part where: 1) the BLM failed to address concerns raised by its own experts, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the EPA, and state agencies; and 2) there was resounding evidence from agency experts that the eighteen amendments to the BLM's grazing regulations may affect listed species and their habitat. However, the order is vacated in part where the district court failed to consider plaintiffs' Federal Land Policy and Management Act claim under the framework and with the deference set forth in Chevron.

More...

[08/31] Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy v. Universal Paragon Corp.
In defendant's suit against a law firm, claiming that an arbitrator's award of $7,554,149.13 in attorney fees and expenses for the law firm, related to its representation of defendant in an underlying complex environmental litigation, is unconscionable and violates public policy, superior court's affirmance of the award is affirmed as, assuming that defendant's claim of unconscionability is subject to judicial review as a predicate for determining whether the arbitration award violates public policy, the claim is rejected on the merits as neither the fee agreement nor the award actually issued by the arbitrator is unconscionable under rule 4-200 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

More...

Commercial Law

[09/01] Hollander v. Copacabana Nightclub
In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action brought against several New York City nightclubs for discriminating against men on “Ladies’ Nights," dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where the nightclubs were not state actors and thus were not subject to section 1983.

More...

[08/31] Sinoying Logistics Pte Ltd. v. Yi Da Xin Trading Corp.
In an action seeking to attach defendant's property in New York as pre-judgment security for a pending arbitration in Hong Kong, dismissal of the action for lack of personal jurisdiction is affirmed where the district court did not err in declining to fashion an equitable remedy in circumstances where it was clear that the original attachment order could not be sustained in light of Shipping Corp. of India Ltd. v. Jaldhi Overseas Pte Ltd., 585 F.3d 58 (2d Cir. 2009).

More...

Print This Page

Practice Areas

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Intellectual Property Attorneys

Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights: Audits, Evaluations, Opinions, Applications, Prosecution, Oppositions, Litigation

The attorneys of the firm have represented industrial, financial, individual and business clients in litigation and protection of intellectual property rights. Attorney Henry Sneath chairs the firm's Intellectual Property Practice Group. Contact him at (412) 288-4013 or hsneath@psmn.com

LITIGATION AND OPPOSITIONS

The internet has changed the intellectual property landscape. Although traditional business continue to have IP disputes, the battleground is more frequently defined by the world wide web and the use of internet communications and technology. Although legislation has been passed by Congress to address certain internet IP concerns, the development of the case law remains somewhat behind the growth of internet technology. High tech companies are registering patents and filing trademarks at an astonishing rate, and the future appears certain to be filled with IP disputes over software and internet applications. We serve as both lead counsel and local counsel for Pennsylvania-based and out-of-state corporations with respect to patent, trademark and copyright litigation and related disputes over licensing, royalties and unfair competition claims under the Lanham Act. We are business trial attorneys who understand both the need to enforce IP rights, and the need to defend against predatory litigation. There are times when the courtroom or the threat of litigation is the only way to resolve a business dispute. Our attorneys also practice before the US Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) and can litigate Trademark Opposition proceedings and related matters. Click here for a link to the USPTO Trademark Section and the TTAB rules and procedures

PATENT, TRADEMARK AND COPYRIGHT: AUDITS, EVALUATIONS, OPINIONS, APPLICATION, PROSECUTION AND PROTECTION

Our attorneys have extensive experience with all aspects of patent, trademark and copyright protection and litigation with specialized training and experience in the biological, chemical, computing, electrical, mechanical, and optical fields. As registered patent attorneys before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), we can draft and obtain patents and trademarks for our clients in a variety of technical fields. In addition to prosecuting patents, trademarks and copyrights, our attorneys have decades of experience handling complex patent litigation matters for Fortune 500 and mid-size companies, both as plaintiffs and defendants. We have successfully represented clients with a variety of different technologies in obtaining favorable settlements or jury verdicts and can utilize our in house technical and patent expertise to provide cost efficient representation of intellectual property disputes. Our attorneys also provide patent and trademark audits, opinions and evaluations for businesses and individuals and consult with these entities in pre-litigation matters. Click here to view a simple chart published by the USPTO which describes the process of applying for a patent.

At Picadio Sneath Miller & Norton, P.C., we can also mediate your intellectual property matter through one of several forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution, including arbitration, mediation or early neutral evaluation. We understand the need to set a litigation or ADR budget and to adhere to that budget.

Western District of Pennsylvania Representation

The United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania is one of a growing number of district courts with Federal Local Patent Rules, and these rules govern all patent litigation filings in Western Pennsylvania. These rules provide for an accelerated case disposition schedule and numerous procedural rules changes relating to Federal Rule 26 disclosures, claim construction, use of expert witnesses and disclosure of infringement or invalidity contentions. The rules are designed to streamline patent litigation and to make Western Pennsylvania a forum of choice for parties filing patent infringement or invalidation actions. Attorneys at the firm have experience in handling matters filed pursuant to these new rules both as principal counsel and as local counsel for out-of-state firms who avail themselves of this jurisdiction or whose clients have been sued in this district. To view the Western District of Pennsylvania Local Patent Rules, please visit the U.S. District Court web site.

The firm's experience in Intellectual Property litigation, prosecution and protection includes the following matters:

Representation of a commercial lighting manufacturer in litigating patent infringement claims.
Representation of medical and pharmaceutical products manufacturers in patent, unfair competition and false advertising matters.
The representation of a metals manufacturer in a trademark dispute.
Advising a small business client regarding copyright and trademark rights and defending his business against attempts to invalidate those rights.
Defending a natural gas exploration company against a patent invalidation lawsuit and prosecuting a counterclaim for patent infringement.
The representation of minority members of a green technology limited liability company in a shareholders' derivative action against the majority member for violations of RICO, fraud, and breach of fiduciary duty.
The representation of a Fortune 500 telecommunication company against a foreign manufacturer for misappropriation of trade secrets and breach of contract.
Representation of a telecommunications company in federal litigation brought under Federal Trademark Dilution Act and Digital Millennium Copyright Act by a designer and manufacturer of networked communications systems and related software.
Representation of a Dutch corporation which owned the exclusive rights and license to the “total image” of one of the world's foremost tennis superstars in action against defendant corporation for breach of endorsement contracts.
Advising a franchise business regarding the need for specialty intellectual property insurance coverage and reviewing several competing proposed insurance policies.
Providing opinions and opinion letters to individuals and companies on patent and trademark rights, risks and liabilities.
Representing employers and employees in disputes over intellectual property licensing, royalties and ownership.
Defending Fortune 500 and mid-sized companies against claims of patent infringement.

Protect Your Investment, Contact Us Today

Our attorneys help clients navigate intellectual property and other business disputes by providing them with the knowledge and information needed to make informed decisions. Contact us for more information when the lawyers at Picadio Sneath Miller & Norton, P.C. can be of assistance to you.

Disclaimer | Site Map