Walgreen, CVS Health settle dispute over refilling prescriptions with mobile-phone scanners

SAN FRANCISCO – Walgreen Co., the largest U.S. drugstore chain, and CVS Health’s CVS/pharmacy unit settled a dispute over a patented technology that lets customers refill prescriptions with mobile-phone scanners.

The suit involved patent 8,626,530, which was issued to Deerfield, Ill.-based Walgreen Jan. 7. The chain filed the infringement suit Jan. 31 in Delaware federal court.

CVS was accused of using the patented application, which runs on iPhones, Android-equipped phones and BlackBerrys, without a license.

According to a Nov. 25 court filing, CVS agreed to halt the infringement, and both parties are to bear their costs of litigation and attorney fees.

- Advertisement -

The case is Walgreen v. CVS Pharmacy Inc., 14-cv-00123, U.S. District Court, District of Delaware (Wilmington).

Apple news

Apple Inc., maker of the iPad and iPhone, received a patent on a system that would let an author autograph an electronic version of a book.

Patent 8,880,602 covers a system that works when a signing device is brought into proximity with a device containing an electronic copy of the author’s book. The technology can also work through an online store, Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple said.

While e-books are cheaper to make, some readers are still attracted to ink on paper. Signed copies of a book often hold special meaning, creating “a need for improved technology for embedding autographs in electronic books,” according to the patent.

The autograph can be authenticated by a variety of methods, such as including a digital photo of the reader and author together or through the issuance of a certificate, according to the patent.

Apple applied for the patent in March 2012, with the assistance of Wilmington, Delaware’s Novak Druce Connolly Bove + Quigg LLP

NFL trademark issue

The National Football League’s Washington Redskins can sue a group of American Indians for seeking to block trademark protection for its name, which has been criticized as offensive.

U.S. District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee in Alexandria, Va., ruling Nov. 25, denied a request to dismiss the case. Throwing out the complaint would deprive the team of the opportunity to review the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s decision to cancel the mark as disparaging, Lee said.

The ruling is the latest in a 22-year dispute over a brand estimated by Forbes to be worth $145 million. The board’s decision to cancel six trademarks, if left intact by the court, would make it harder for the team to enforce rights to its name. The franchise ranked third in the NFL in August with a valuation of $1.7 billion, according to Forbes.

The team sued in August, seeking to reverse the ruling that its name was no longer entitled to federal trademark protection. Team owner Daniel Snyder has said the name was intended to honor Native Americans and he won’t change it.

“We are disappointed by the court’s legal ruling on our motion to dismiss, but our Native American clients remain confident that we will ultimately prevail in this case,” Jeffrey Lopez of Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP in Washington, an attorney for the group opposing the name, said in an e-mail.

Robert Raskopf, a lawyer for the team, didn’t immediately return a phone call and e-mail seeking comment on the decision.

A group of American Indians first petitioned the trademark office in 1992 to cancel the team’s marks because they were scandalous.

Both sides won subsequent court rulings and reversals, with the case resuming in March 2010 after the U.S. Supreme Court denied review, according to Lee’s opinion. The federal board issued its most recent cancellation decision in June, triggering the team’s lawsuit.

The case is Pro-Football Inc. v. Blackhorse, 14-cv-01043, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria).

Dotcom says he’s ‘broke’

Kim Dotcom, who is fighting extradition to the U.S. on criminal copyright conspiracy charges, said he has spent more than 10 million pounds ($15.8 million) on legal costs and is now “broke,” the BBC reported.

He said he will represent himself at a legal hearing in New Zealand, according to the BBC.

Dotcom said his lawyers resigned because they weren’t being paid, according to the BBC.

He’s the founder of Megaupload, a file-sharing site through which movies and music were allegedly shared without authorization, the BBC said.

No posts to display