Collaborative law is a process for hearing the legal issues associated with obtaining a divorce without the intervention of the courts. In the collaborative model, each spouse has their own lawyer who is specifically trained in the practice of collaborative law. Lawyers and parties agree not to involve the court in resolving various divorce-related issues, such as property division, alimony, custody, and parental leave. Parties can also call on neutral experts such as financial specialists, divorce coaches, and child specialists. These experts assist the parties in negotiating the issues that are the subject of their expertise. The cooperation process is voluntary and requires the parties to commit to cooperate in good faith and with full disclosure of all information relevant to the dispute to reach a settlement. As we have described in our biographies, our professionals are dedicated to serving the public. We believe that our obligation, both to our profession and as judicial officers, is to serve our legal community by helping those in need. We are proud to be a “supporting law firm” of the Legal Services Society and are committed to supporting LAS in fulfilling its mission to ensure that poverty is not a barrier to access to justice. Back in February, I wrote on these pages about my search for a new rower for my basement gym, as well as my excitement when I saw another intellectual property complaint in the premium hypercompetitive home training space. Since then, I have chosen one of the rowers in the NordicTrack environment and I enjoy the educational videos and challenging rowing programs (thanks also to the readers who wrote me with recommendations). More importantly, the lawsuit I filed between Hydrow and iFit already matches my prediction that the case was a “promising major intellectual property dispute.” Specifically, on April 5, 2022, Hydrow filed an injunction against iFit`s “new RW900 rower,” as well as a recently launched rower available at a lower price. Fortunately, a redacted copy of Hydrow`s application recently became available.

Third, since the Hydrow case involves allegations of design and trade dress, it is of the utmost importance for the plaintiff to have an idea of the judge`s assessment of the merits as soon as possible. Claims relating to designs and trade dress involve an element of subjectivity, at least in the real world, since the infringement criteria that the court must apply are relatively visual. In practice, many district judges in such cases like to see samples of the accused product at an initial conference, or at least photos if the product in question is too large to be easily displayed in the courtroom. Therefore, it is not surprising that Hydrow`s PI movement is strong in the images, with many views from different points of view, as well as comparisons of the accused rower with patented drawings and prior art. Couples are often attracted to the idea of reaching an agreement through a more collaborative process with the help of a mediator. Although a mediator does not defend a party`s position, he or she helps them identify issues that need to be resolved, provides them with legal information, and helps them reach an agreement that appears fair and equitable to each party. We handle all legal issues associated with unmarried people having children together, including fatherhood, financial support for children, how parents make decisions about children, and when children will see each parent. We strive to make co-parenting as transparent and stress-free as possible. We also help unmarried people protect their rights to property acquired during their intimate relationships through cohabitation agreements and asset sharing measures. PLLC can help you find legal solutions to your problem. The firm serves the New York, New York space. Ultimately, it is difficult to influence the likelihood of success of an IP application without seeing the respondent`s response.

In this case, a rather aggressive information schedule has been established for the application, and the information session is expected to be completed by June 7. One can imagine that Hydrow hopes to make a decision on its IP application as soon as possible, but certainly before the holiday season. As a small player, Hydrow has a lot at stake to protect its reputation as an innovator and premium supplier. On the other hand, iFit seems well placed enough to argue this case to the end or, if things seem bleak, either push for a deal or refocus on selling rowers with its old design. I will watch from the shore as they move forward in this fascinating regatta in the courtroom. If you need legal representation for yourself, contact Doar Rieck Kaley & Mack in New York, New York. In addition to visual cues, Hydrow`s IP movement seeks to determine how the Hydrow`s design drives the company`s sales in the highly competitive indoor rowing market.