Anticipate This!™ | Patent and Trademark Law Blog

$255K In Fees To Google For ‘Frivolous’ Ramey Case Upheld

The Federal Circuit has affirmed a California district court’s award of nearly $255,000 in attorney fees and sanctions against EscapeX IP LLC, a client of Ramey LLP, for filing a “frivolous” patent infringement suit against Google. The suit, targeting YouTube and YouTube Music for alleged patent violations, was found by U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria to lack merit and to have been pursued without an adequate pre-suit investigation. Google argued the products either did not contain the patented features or predated the patent.

After the district court awarded over $191,000 in fees and later sanctioned EscapeX and Ramey attorneys $63,000 for filing a “reckless” motion seeking reconsideration, EscapeX appealed. The Federal Circuit rejected its arguments, including claims that the fees punished it for being a nonpracticing entity, finding no evidence of bias and upholding the district court’s conclusions on frivolousness and inadequate investigation. The court emphasized that attorneys must investigate claims before filing and avoid frivolous motions.

Ramey LLP has faced additional scrutiny, including recent sanctions for sharing Netflix’s confidential information and practicing law in California without a license. William Ramey III, representing EscapeX, criticized the Federal Circuit’s opinion, disputing claims regarding evidence and argument presentation. The case, EscapeX IP LLC v. Google LLC, involves U.S. Patent No. 9,009,113. Judges Taranto, Stoll, and Stark presided over the Federal Circuit panel.

#PatentLaw #IntellectualProperty #IPLitigation #PatentInfringement #LegalNews #FederalCircuit #Sanctions #AttorneyFees #RameyLLP #Google #NonpracticingEntity #FrivolousLawsuit #WardLawOffice #PatentlyGoodIdeas

In this video series from Ward Law Office | Registered Patent Attorneys, Founding Member Jake Ward answers basic questions about patents, trademarks, and inventing in a rapid fire and unscripted format!

Warner Bros. Appeals Village Roadshow’s Ch. 11 Rights Sale

Warner Brothers has asked a Delaware bankruptcy judge to pause the $18.5 million sale of its former business partner Village Roadshow’s derivative film rights while it appeals the deal. The studio co-produced and co-financed films like The Matrix and Joker with Village Roadshow and argues that the sale to Alcon Media Group LLC would force it to share confidential information about upcoming projects with an unvetted partner. Warner Brothers also raised concerns over Alcon’s financial capacity to co-finance derivative works and the potential risk to current projects, including a sequel to Practical Magic.

Village Roadshow filed for Chapter 11 in March, citing a falling out with Warner Brothers and unsuccessful efforts to launch an independent studio. Its assets were divided into three categories for sale: its film library, studio, and derivative rights. Alcon emerged as the winning bidder for all three, with the bankruptcy judge approving purchases totaling over $439 million, including $18.5 million for the derivative rights.

Warner Brothers contends the derivative rights contracts were nontransferable and relied on a close, trusted relationship, describing them as both a financial accommodation and a personal services agreement. The studio is seeking a stay of the sale while its appeal is pending, arguing that once confidential information is shared, the harm cannot be undone. Alcon is also suing Warner Brothers, Tesla, and Elon Musk over alleged use of film footage in promotional materials.

The case is In re: Village Roadshow Entertainment Group USA, U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, case number 1:25-bk-10475.

#WarnerBros #VillageRoadshow #AlconMedia #Bankruptcy #FilmIndustry #HollywoodNews #FilmRights #DerivativeWorks #MovieProduction #LegalNews #WardLawOffice #PatentlyGoodIdeas

Congratulations to Ward Law Office client, Fossil Outdoor Inc.!

We proudly celebrate the issuance of U.S. Utility Patent No. 12,479,189, titled “Hydration Bladder Drying Apparatus And Method Of Manufacture”, granted on November 25th, 2025.

The described moisture removal apparatus is designed to manage and reduce moisture within a container by enabling controlled absorption and evaporation. The apparatus is configured for partial insertion into a primary opening of a moisture-containing container, allowing it to interact simultaneously with the internal moisture environment and the external air.

The apparatus includes a first end portion that is positioned inside the moisture-containing region of the container. This first end portion incorporates a first material layer specifically engineered to absorb moisture present within the container. Once moisture is absorbed, this first material layer facilitates the transfer of moisture to a second material layer, enabling efficient internal moisture transport. The layered material structure supports continuous moisture movement away from the container’s interior, reducing moisture accumulation over time.

A second end portion of the apparatus is spaced apart from the first end portion and extends outside the container. This external portion is designed to receive the transported moisture from the second material layer. Importantly, the second end portion is exposed directly to ambient air, allowing the absorbed moisture to evaporate naturally. By leveraging airflow and evaporation, the apparatus enables passive moisture removal without the need for external power or active mechanical components.

Overall, the apparatus provides an effective and efficient moisture management solution by combining internal moisture absorption with external evaporation. Its configuration allows it to be easily integrated into existing containers while maintaining a continuous moisture removal pathway. This design is particularly suitable for applications where controlling humidity or preventing moisture buildup is essential, such as storage containers, packaging systems, or enclosed environments sensitive to moisture.

Once again, Ward Law Office | Registered Patent Attorneys congratulates Fossil Outdoor Inc. on this achievement. This patent exemplifies a passive moisture management system that combines absorption and evaporation to control humidity inside a container.

#MoistureControl #HumidityManagement #PassiveDehumidifier #MoistureAbsorption #EvaporationTech #MaterialScience #StorageSolutions #PackagingInnovation #WardLawOffice #PatentlyGoodIdeas

Congratulations to Ward Law Office client, Principle Business Enterprises, Inc.!

We proudly celebrate the issuance of U.S. Utility Patent No. 12,458,266, titled “Monitoring Devices, Systems, And Methods For Detecting Wetness In a Garment”, granted on November 4th, 2025.

The disclosure describes a monitoring device designed to detect wetness in a garment, along with related transmission systems and methods. The device includes a clip that is removably attachable to a garment and houses a printed circuit board (PCB). A plurality of conductive pins are electrically connected to the PCB, with portions of the pins extending through the clip to make contact with the garment. The pins are arranged in a specific geometric configuration: a first and second pin are aligned along a first axis of the clip, while a third pin is aligned along a second axis that is spaced from the first. This multi-axis pin arrangement enables reliable communication between the PCB and the garment when the clip is attached, facilitating accurate detection of moisture or wetness.

The disclosure further introduces transmitters integrated with the monitoring device that include built-in delay mechanisms. These delay mechanisms are configured to postpone the transmission of operational data for a predetermined period of time. The delayed transmission helps manage power consumption, reduce false alerts, or ensure that only meaningful events are communicated. The operational data transmitted by the device may include moisture detection data, indicating the presence or level of wetness, as well as detachment information, which signals whether the device has been removed from the garment.

In addition, the disclosure outlines methods for determining and processing operational data generated by the monitoring device. These methods encompass detecting wetness, identifying attachment or detachment states, and managing the timing and content of data transmissions. Together, the device, transmission mechanisms, and methods provide a comprehensive system for monitoring garment wetness in a reliable and controlled manner.

Once again, Ward Law Office | Registered Patent Attorneys congratulates Principle Business Enterprises, Inc. on this achievement. This patent exemplifies a smart wearable sensing system for physiological or condition monitoring, specifically focused on moisture detection in garments.

#WearableTechnology #SmartTextiles #GarmentSensors #MoistureDetection #WetnessMonitoring #HealthcareWearables #SensorDesign #PowerManagement #WardLawOffice #PatentlyGoodIdeas

Boeing Says Colo. Co. Waived Privilege For Shared Docs

Boeing has asked a Washington federal judge to rule that Wilson Aerospace waived attorney-client privilege and work-product protection over roughly 220 documents that Wilson inadvertently produced during discovery in their ongoing dispute. Wilson, a Colorado company accusing Boeing of misappropriating proprietary technology for NASA’s Artemis moon program, supplied a hard-drive production in early November that included numerous clearly privileged materials. According to Boeing, many of the documents were marked “attorney client,” included attorney names, contained draft complaints—some with handwritten notes—and were stored in folders titled “Lawsuit” or “Lawsuit Research.”

After Boeing alerted Wilson on November 10, Wilson acknowledged that many of the identified documents were likely privileged and inadvertently produced. However, Boeing argues Wilson has failed to take the steps required under Federal Rule of Evidence 502(b) to reclaim the documents, including promptly requesting a clawback, explaining how the disclosure occurred, or demonstrating reasonable measures to prevent such disclosure. Boeing also notes that Wilson has not provided the privilege log required under the parties’ protective order and has given no details about its purported multi-layer privilege review, such as search terms or who conducted manual review.

Boeing contends Wilson’s delays and lack of clarity raise doubts about whether any meaningful privilege review occurred at all. The disclosure issue also caused a deposition of a Wilson principal to be postponed. The underlying suit, filed in 2023, accuses Boeing of using Wilson’s patented technology without authorization.

#Boeing #WilsonAerospace #IPLaw #IntellectualProperty #PatentDispute #LegalNews #AttorneyClientPrivilege #WorkProduct #DiscoveryDispute #FederalCourt #ArtemisProgram #WardLawOffice #PatentlyGoodIdeas