Litigation Cases

In addition to domain name and e-commerce litigation cases, the copyright attorneys and lawyers of Schmeiser, Olsen & Watts are regularly called upon to defend and protect the intellectual property rights of their clients through various channels of litigation. Our attorneys are actively involved in litigating cases in state and federal courts throughout the United States, including copyright, domain name and e commerce litigation cases. Through our efforts, our clients have won victories in court and obtained favorable settlements. Additionally, because the majority of all litigation is settled or decided out of court, our attorneys are often able to successfully negotiate favorable agreements for our clients before they ever go to trial.

As for our previous litigation activities, we have successfully represented defendants in patent infringement lawsuits in cases involving highly successful products sold by our clients. Using evidence of patent invalidity as leverage, we have negotiated highly favorable defenses for our clients. Other times we have successfully represented clients through trial in copyright infringement lawsuits. We even have successfully represented the plaintiff in one of the first domain name litigation cases filed in the nation under the Anti-Cybersquatting provisions of the Federal Lanham Act.

The following is a representative list of publicly published litigation cases handled by Schmeiser, Olsen & Watts.

Hsin Ten Enterprise. United States v. Clark Enterprise, 00 Civ. 5878 (SAS), 149 F. Supp. 2d 60; 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9074, July 3, 2001 (Markman Hearing in Design Patent litigation).

Jackrel v. Paragon Sporting Goods, 99 Civ. 10609 (NRB), 2001 U.S. Dist. 5214, April 23, 2001.

National Corrective Training Institute, Inc., dba National Curriculum and Training Institute v. George Nelson, Clime Int'l, Inc; and Mitchell Voron, dba Positive Solutions Associates (aka P.S.I.) (aka P.S.A.), (U.S.D.C. Utah, Central Division, 1999) [Alleged trade dress and copyright infringement decided for Defendant.]

NXIVM Corp. v. Ross Inst., Docket No. 037952,UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, 364 F.3d 471; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 7608; 70 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1538; Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P28,800, November 19, 2003, Argued, April 20, 2004, Decided, As Amended, April 30, 2004.

New York Racing Ass'n v. Perlmutter Publishing (U.S.D.C., N.D.N.Y., 1997) [Alleged trade dress and copyright infringement decided for defendant based on first amendment rights.]

Rowpar Pharmaceuticals, et al. V. Neways, Inc., et al. (U.S.D.C. Arizona, 2000) [Alleged patent infringement. Consent Judgement Filed.]

Schaefer Fan Co., Inc. and Ronald E. Schaefer v. Universal Fog, Inc. (U.S.D.C. Minn., 4th Division, 2000) [Alleged Patent Infringement decided for Defendant on Summary Judgement.]