During these challenging times, Severson & Werson remains open and in full operation, consistent with the firm’s previously established contingency planning. While many of our attorneys and staff will be working remotely, as a firm, we continue in full operation. We are here to help, as always.

Intellectual Property

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 (CFAA), which subjects to criminal liability anyone who “intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access.” 18 U. S. C. §1030(a)(2). " Exceeds authorized access” is defined to mean “to access a computer with authorization and to use such access to obtain or alter information in the computer that the… Read More

In a reverse confusion trademark infringement case, the senior trademark owner claims that customers are confused by the junior infringer into thinking that the senior's goods emanate from the junior because of its higher public profile.  Here, IronHawk was the senior user of SmartSync for its file compression and transfer software.  It claimed that Dropbox's use of Smart Sync on… Read More

Google's use of 11,000 lines of programming code that Oracle's subsidiary Sun Microsystems had prepared and copyrighted was a fair use and thus not actionable infringement of Oracle's copyright.  The copied lines were "method calls," essentially a user interface that allows programmers to designate the standard subroutines they wish their program to invoke to perform certain functions.  Sun had adopted… Read More

The Ninth Circuit applies the abuse of discretion standard of review to review a summary judgment in a trademark infringement case if the summary judgment is granted on equitable grounds such as unclean hands, laches or acquiescence. Read More

The district court correctly granted summary judgment to plaintiff on its copyright infringement claims arising from defendants' copying its copyrighted fabric designs.  To be copyrightable, a work must be original, that is not copied.  But unlike a patent, a copyright does not require that the original work be unlike prior art.  Here, plaintiff's floral fabric coloring design was independently created,… Read More

The federal Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (18 USC 1831 et seq.) proscribes the wrongful acquisition, disclosure or use of a trade secret without the owner's permission.  Unlike the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, the DTSA does not contain a provision expressly disallowing claims for continued unpermitted use of the trade secret after the DTSA's enactment, if the use began… Read More

CCP 2019.210 provides that in a trade secret  misappropriation case under Civ. Code 3426, before commencing discovery relating to the trade secret, the party alleging the misappropriation shall identify the trade secret with reasonable particularity.  This decision holds that the plaintiff cannot wait to raise a new alleged trade secret in opposition to a summary judgment motion directed towards its… Read More

After negotiating unsuccessfully to buy plaintiff or "acqui-hire" its key employees, Apple enticed those key employees to quit plaintiff and go to work for Apple.  Held, summary judgment for Apple affirmed.  Plaintiff's fraud claim was based on three promises Apple made during negotiations.  Promises are actionable as fraud only when, at the time the promise is made, the promisor does… Read More

1 2 3 4