Call Tucker IP Today! 954.204.0444 or 305.423.9713|info@TuckeripLaw.com
FacebookTwitterGoogle+Linkedin

Yearly Archives: 2014

Home/2014

Patent Attorney Review of Correct Craft IP Holdings v. Trick Towers

Patent Attorney Review of Correct Craft IP Holdings, LLC v. Trick Towers, LLC South Florida Patent Attorneys keep busy with the steady stream of innovation coming from the marine industry.  In Correct Craft Holdings v. Trick Towers[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][1], the patent attorney for the plaintiff filed a complaint alleging that the Defendant had sold or offered for sale a water sport tower contained in the Plaintiff’s patent.  It is not uncommon, however, for the Defendant who was served with the complaint for patent infringement to simply […]

By | 2017-05-18T18:53:17+00:00 February 5th, 2014|Patents|Comments Off on Patent Attorney Review of Correct Craft IP Holdings v. Trick Towers
Read More

Dog Bite Attorney Review of Maddox v. FFBG

Dog Bite Attorney Review of Maddox v. Florida Farm Bureau General, Etc. In Maddox v. Florida Farm Bureau General, Etc., dog bite attorneys on both sides agreed that Crystal Maddox and her son Ivan were each bit in the face by the dog, Dixie.[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][1]  The bite to Maddox came after she attempted to remove Dixie’s bite from Ivan’s face.  The question that the dog bite attorneys disputed over was whether […]

By | 2017-05-18T18:53:17+00:00 January 29th, 2014|Civil Litigation, Dog Bite|Comments Off on Dog Bite Attorney Review of Maddox v. FFBG
Read More

Accident Attorney Review of Coddington v. Nunez

In Coddington v. Nunez, an accident attorney brought a client’s case before the court on behalf of Jaime Nunez.[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][1]  Mr. Nunez was involved in an automobile accident in which his vehicle was struck by Thomas and Gwynneth Coddington.  The case put forth by the accident attorney returned a jury verdict finding $600,000 in total sustained damages.  However, the jury found that Mr. Nunez was twenty-five percent liable for his injuries and accordingly, his accident attorney secured a final judgment in the amount of $488,500.  See Id.  The appellate court reversed because the trial court erred when it […]

By | 2017-05-18T18:53:17+00:00 January 26th, 2014|Car Accident, Civil Litigation|Comments Off on Accident Attorney Review of Coddington v. Nunez
Read More

Accident Attorney Review of Pack v. Geico

With medical bills on the line, the appellants accident attorney in the case below filed an appeal after the jury awarded zero damages. In Vicky Pack v. Geico General Insurance Company, Vicky Pack’s accident attorney filed suit against Ms. Pack’s insurance company, Geico, against her uninsured motorist policy.[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][1]  The Accident Attorney for Geico conceded at the start of trial that […]

By | 2017-05-18T18:53:17+00:00 January 23rd, 2014|Car Accident, Civil Litigation|Comments Off on Accident Attorney Review of Pack v. Geico
Read More

Patent Attorney review of Miami Tech v. Perez

In Miami Tech, Inc. v. Perez, the Court granted the patent attorney for the Defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a patent infringement claim for which relief can be granted.  Case No. 13-CV-21681.  The declaratory action asked the court to declare that the patent registration No. 8,348,071 was invalid.[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][1]  Plaintiff’s patent attorney alleged that Defendant committed inequitable conduct in obtaining the patent because allegedly […]

By | 2017-05-18T18:53:17+00:00 January 19th, 2014|Patents|Comments Off on Patent Attorney review of Miami Tech v. Perez
Read More