Miami Intellectual Property Attorneys | Miami IP Lawyer

Michael Cesarano's Representative Cases/Matters

Representative Cases/Matters


  • Latimer v. Roaring Toyz, Inc., et al. , Case No. 8:06-cv-1921, (M.D. Fla.); 2010 WL 3747148 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 21, 2010)(on appeal):  Represented Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A. and other defendants in suit for copyright infringement for using promotional photographs in marketing activities. District Court ruled that defendants had a license to use the photographs. Case was appealed and remanded.  On remand, District Court granted summary judgment for defendants and case was settled pending a second appeal.

  • Mary Queen of the Third Millennium v. The Foundation for a Christian Civilization, Opposition No. 91/157,073, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board: Represented Mary Queen of the Third Millennium (the U.S. legal representative of an international religious order) in trademark opposition to prevent registration of order’s ceremonial garment (a religious habit) as a trademark for breakaway group attempting to preclude order’s members from using the garment.  Ordered that religious garment is not registrable as a trademark for breakaway group. Decision was affirmed on appeal.

  • Jeff Lynne, et al. v. John Regna, et al., Case No. 2:00-cv-4403 (C.D. Cal. 2000): Represented former members of Electric Light Orchestra in trademark infringement suit brought by Jeff Lynne, original founder of the band. Court determined that Lynne’s trademark had not been infringed by former members of band.

  • Novo Industries, LP v. Micromolds Corporation, et al., 355 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2003): Represented defendant accused of infringing plaintiff’s patent.  In the lower court, jury found liability based on judge’s erroneous instruction. Decision was reversed on appeal and patent was held to be invalid.

  • Jaswant S. Pannu and Jaswant S. Pannu, M.D., P.a. v Iolab Corporation, 155 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 1998): Won jury verdict in favor of client against Iolab Corp., a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, in a case alleging infringement of client’s patent.

  • Bageland, Inc. v. Rachael, Inc., Case No. 0:90-cv-6197 (S.D. Fla. 1990): Represented client who was a franchisee of Bageland, and was authorized to operate a restaurant under that name. After Bageland permitted another restaurant to operate within the client’s exclusive territory, client terminated the franchise and changed the name of its restaurant. The trial court found the franchise to have been validly terminated. On the plaintiff’s appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the decision was upheld in all respects.

  • Triarch Inc. v. Trans Globe Lighting, Inc., Case No. 1:91-cv-1337 (S.D. Fla. 1991): Represented Defendant accused of infringement of the plaintiff’s design patent. The trial court misinterpreted the patent and found infringement. On appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the trial court judgment was reversed, the Court of Appeals finding that the judge had not understood the patent, and holding that patent was not infringed.

  • Ron Matusalem & Matusa of Florida, Inc. v. Ron Matusalem, Inc., 872 F.2d 1547 (11th Cir. 1989): Represented the plaintiff in a trademark infringement action based upon the defendant’s failure to adhere to quality controls set forth in the trademark license. The defendant was required to adhere to the quality control standards dictated by licensor.  Trial court decision upheld on appeal.