We are two weeks out from arguments in the Federal Circuit’s August sitting, so it is time for our monthly oral argument recap. As it has done for the past several years, the Court heard arguments on only three days in...more
Last week was Court week, and some of the Rule 36s in argued cases have already come down. Below we give our usual week’s statistics and case of the week—our highly subjective selection based on whatever case piqued our...more
Is it just us or does March 4 — the date of our last issue — feel like a million years ago? Like you, and not necessarily in this order, we have been: doing our work; keeping up with COVID-19-related laws, guidance, and...more
7/15/2020
/ Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) ,
Arbitration ,
Auto-Dialed Calls ,
BSA/AML ,
CARES Act ,
Consent Order ,
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) ,
Coronavirus/COVID-19 ,
CRA ,
Dodd-Frank ,
E-SIGN ,
Fair Lending ,
FASB ,
FDIC ,
Federal Reserve ,
FinCEN ,
FinTech ,
HMDA ,
Interim Final Rules (IFR) ,
Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility (MMLF) ,
OCC ,
Paycheck Protection Program Lending Facility (PPPLF) ,
Popular ,
Remittance Transfer Rule ,
Request For Information ,
RESPA ,
SPVs ,
TCPA ,
Volcker Rule
With the start of the Federal Circuit’s July oral arguments, we thought it made sense to look back at the Court’s first three months of telephonic hearings (April, May, and June). What do those sittings show about how the...more
Brian Matsui, Seth Lloyd, and Samuel Goldstein authored an article for Law360 covering how the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has streamlined its docket and moved oral arguments from the courtroom to conference...more
As courts across the country grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, the Federal Circuit has streamlined its docket and moved oral arguments from the courtroom to conference calling. Early indications suggest that is changing how...more
While the rest of us wait on the Federal Circuit’s decision on the rehearing petitions in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., there are signs that the Federal Circuit judges themselves may already have moved on.
In...more
3/23/2020
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Judicial Appointments ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pending Litigation ,
Presidential Appointments ,
Removal At-Will
Lower courts’ inability or refusal to confine cases to their proper fora compels the Supreme Court to spend precious docket space restating the rules governing personal jurisdiction.
The Due Process Clauses of the Fifth...more
On the same day that patent challengers breathed a sigh of relief once the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of inter partes review (IPR) in Oil States, the Court also threw a monkey wrench into the way IPRs will be...more
After the biggest challenge yet to the Patent and Trademark Office’s popular inter partes review proceedings, the name of the game is largely “same old” for today’s Supreme Court decision in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v....more
It seems like it happens every spring: Once again, the U.S. Supreme Court has reversed a state court’s expansive view of personal jurisdiction. In BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, the Supreme Court reversed the Montana Supreme...more
In its most recent decisions on personal jurisdiction, the U.S. Supreme Court has reiterated the distinction between general personal jurisdiction on the one hand and specific personal jurisdiction on the other.
As to...more
In its most recent decisions on personal jurisdiction, the Supreme Court has reiterated the distinction between general personal jurisdiction on the one hand and specific personal jurisdiction on the other. As to the former,...more
The United States Supreme Court decided today that: (1) the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) acted within its rulemaking authority by adopting the rule that patent claims must be given their “broadest...more
6/21/2016
/ Administrative Proceedings ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard ,
Chevron Deference ,
Claim Construction ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies v Lee ,
Final Judgment ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Standard of Review ,
USPTO
Here we go again: The United States Supreme Court today decided to review two more intellectual property cases. That makes three IP cases so far for next Term (which begins this October), already equaling the number of IP...more
5/3/2016
/ Cheerleaders ,
Fashion Design ,
Laches ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v First Quality Baby Products ,
SCOTUS ,
Sports Apparel ,
Star Athletica v Varsity Brands ,
Statute of Limitations ,
The Copyright Act
The 2015 Changes to the Federal Rules Matter for Your Patent Case and Tech Business: Getting in the Courthouse Door Just Got Tougher -
It used to be that a complaint for patent infringement would survive a motion to...more
4/22/2016
/ America Invents Act ,
Anti-Monopoly ,
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard ,
Copyright Infringement ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies v Lee ,
FRAND ,
Germany ,
Huawei ,
Injunctions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Japan ,
Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) ,
Judicial Review ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Pleading Standards ,
SCOTUS ,
Standard Essential Patents ,
USPTO ,
Websites ,
ZTE
Not so fast: the United States Supreme Court is set to review the America Invents Act’s (“AIA”) fast-track inter partes review (“IPR”) process. On January 15, 2016, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Cuozzo Speed...more
1/21/2016
/ America Invents Act ,
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard ,
Certiorari ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Rulemaking Process ,
SCOTUS ,
USPTO
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l (No. 13-298) to decide “[w]hether claims to computer-implemented inventions . . . are directed to patent-eligible subject matter...more
On February 25, 2014, the Supreme Court decided Walden v. Fiore, No. 12-574. The unanimous opinion reversed the Ninth Circuit’s holding that Nevada had specific personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant who had...more
Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. v. Hoeper, 571 U.S. ---, No. 12-315 (2014), holding that immunity for an air carrier under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, 49...more
On January 14, 2014, the Supreme Court decided Daimler AG v. Bauman, No. 11-965—a closely watched personal jurisdiction case. In an opinion authored by Justice Ginsburg for eight Justices, the Court reversed the Ninth...more
On October 15, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in the first of two significant personal jurisdiction cases on the docket: DaimlerChrysler AG v. Bauman, No. 11-965 (cert. granted Apr. 22, 2013). At first glance,...more
The Supreme Court granted certiorari yesterday to decide whether a court can deny immunity under the Aviation Transportation Security Act (ATSA) in a defamation case without first deciding whether an airline’s report to the...more
On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its en banc decision in CLS Bank Int’l v. Alice Corp. The decision includes seven separate opinions spanning 135 pages, but the only precedential portion...more
On April 22, 2013, the Supreme Court granted review in another personal jurisdiction case: DaimlerChrysler AG v. Bauman, No. 11-965 (cert. granted Apr. 22, 2013). The question presented in DaimlerChrysler is “whether it...more