Baker Sterchi’s intellectual property attorneys work closely with clients to protect their trademark and copyright intellectual property rights. Our attorneys have extensive experience counseling and representing clients with their trademark and copyright legal needs.
The firm's intellectual property services include, but are not limited to, trademark and copyright filing and protection, litigation, domain name issues, and intellectual property related contract negotiation and drafting.
Specifically, our attorneys counsel and represent clients in connection with the following:
For more information
- Trademark clearance, prosecution, enforcement, and monitoring
- Infringement litigation and defense
- Bringing and defending proceedings before the Trademark Trial & Appeal Board
- Copyright registration and enforcement
- International registration and protection
- Drafting licensing, endorsement, co-branding and other related contracts
- Domain name issues such as registration and disputes, including before UDRP
- Providing intellectual property-related guidance about marketing material and website design and development
about our Intellectual Property practice contact John Patterson
News & Events
| Travis McDonald joins Baker Sterchi's St. Louis office as an associate. His practice is focused on litigation with an emphasis in insurance defense in product liability, premises liability, and personal injury claims.
| Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice Member John Patterson is quoted in an IPWatchdog.com article about the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act, reintroduced as H.R. 2426 in the U.S. House of Representatives on May 1. Patterson opines in the article that...
| Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice is pleased to welcome Douglas Hill as an attorney with the firm's Kansas City office. Hill is an experienced litigator, managing a diverse civil defense practice that includes professional negligence, product liability, industrial and job site injuries, and general business litigation. He has extensive experience representing ...
| In an update to a prior post, Senate Bill 591 (which seeks to impose stricter standards for the application of punitive damages) cleared The Missouri House on May 12, 2020 in a 98-51 vote. The Bill, now on its way to Governor Parson for his signature, will likely go into effect on August 28, 2020. Governor Parson is expected to sign the measure without veto.
| The data is out on Kansas City area jury verdicts for calendar year 2019, and it contains mostly good news for defendants. While the total number of jury verdicts was up slightly from 2018, the percentage of those verdicts in plaintiffs' favor was down, with nearly 60% of claims that went to a jury ending in a defense verdict. 2019 also saw a drop of almost 30% in the number of verdicts over $1 million. Although the data shows a rise in the average verdict amount, that increase is entirely attributable to a single mega verdict of more than $100 million; controlling for that outlier, the size of the average award was also down significantly.
| SECOND UPDATE: Missouri Governor Mike Parson signs Senate Bill 7, which amends venue and joinder laws, to prevent out of state plaintiffs from litigating their cases in an inappropriate venue.
| UPDATE: House Passes Senate Bill 7, in which the Missouri legislature seeks to amend venue and joinder laws, to prevent out of state plaintiffs from litigating their cases in an inappropriate venue.
| The Illinois Appellate Court, First District, held that a party may timely withdraw a previously disclosed testifying expert and redesignate said expert as a Rule 201(b)(3) consultant entitled to the consultant's privilege against disclosure absent exceptional circumstances.
| In Senate Bill 7, the Missouri legislature seeks to amend venue and joinder laws, to prevent out of state plaintiffs from litigating their cases in an inappropriate venue.
| Defense attorneys beware. The 2018-2019 American Tort Reform Foundation's (ATRF) Judicial Hellholes Report is out, and the City of St. Louis landed fourth on this list because of its massive verdicts, forum shopping, and legislative failures.
| In this case, a corporate successor, Central Trust sued the former employee of its acquired company, Springfield Trust after the employee started a business which directly competed with his former employer and Central Trust.