The Chartwell Chronicles: New Jersey Attorney Fees
Policyholders vs. Insurers: 3 Arguments to Make When Selecting Defense Counsel & Hourly Rates
Hinshaw Insurance Law TV: Recent Changes in Florida Property Insurance Law and How They Will Affect First Party Insurance
How to Secure Advances to Fund Legal Fees
Legislative Update: Cannabis, COVID-19, COMAR and More
Let's Talk About How Much It Costs To Get Divorced
Employment Law and Attorney Fees from the Employee Perspective | Jason Smith | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Let's Talk Retaining a Family Law Lawyer
The Dangers of Untimely Filings – What Employers Need to Know
THE PAPER CHASE
VIDEO: Are PA Workers Compensation Attorney Fees Now Taken from Medical Benefits Too?
What Should I Do If My Employer Failed to Pay Me Wages?
6 Key Takeaways | Ethics Developments in California
Meritas Capability Webinar - Controlling Where to Fight and Who Pays for it?
Who pays attorney fees in a divorce proceeding?
SEC Whistleblower Program: What Employers Need to Know
Bill on Bankruptcy: Lawyers Must Disclose What Clients Pay
Bill on Bankruptcy: Stockton May Win the Battle, Lose the War
What Makes a Case Exceptional? Panel: Chief Judge Moore and Judges Lourie and Albright,[1] with Judge Albright authoring the opinion. You should read this case if: you are seeking or opposing an award of attorneys’ fees under...more
Luv N’ Care, Ltd. and Nouri E. Hakim v. Lindsey Laurain and Eazy-PZ, LLC, Nos. 2022-1905, 2022-1970 (Fed. Cir. April 12, 2024) addressed several issues, including: (1) what evidence of litigation misconduct may support a...more
Last week in Luv n’ Care, Ltd. v. Laurain, the Federal Circuit put the lower court in time out and probably made Eazy-PZ, LLC (EZPZ) cry just a little bit harder. In this precedential decision involving U.S. Patent No....more
In re PersonalWeb Technologies LLC, Appeals Nos. 2021-1858, -1859, -1860 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 3, 2023) In this appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, the question before the...more
The Federal Circuit passed on Pure Hemp’s ask for attorney fees and sanctions in United Cannabis, Corp. v. Pure Hemp Collective Inc., No. 22-1363 (Fed. Cir. May 8, 2023). Agreeing with the district court, the appellate panel...more
Phillip Morris can’t seem to catch its breath. As discussed in a previous post, just a few weeks ago the Federal Circuit upheld the ITC’s ban on the importation and sale of Phillip Morris’s line of heated tobacco and...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...more
Mobility Workx, LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, Appeal No. 2020-1441 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 13, 2021) - In this week’s Case of the Week, a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit considered, and rejected, new...more
The US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit reversed a judgment of trade secret misappropriation because the plaintiff had not proved that the defendant’s duty to maintain the secret arose at the time it acquired the secret....more
At Federal Circuitry blog, we like to check in once in a while on what the Federal Circuit is doing in its orders that don’t get posted on the public website. Those orders often offer nuggets about practice at the Federal...more
INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I LLC v. TREND MICRO INCORPORATED - Before Dyk, Taranto, and Stoll. Appeal from the Delaware District Court Summary: An exceptional case finding may be based on a single isolated act, but the court...more
A weekly summary of the precedential patent-related opinions issued by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the opinions designated precedential or informative by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit modified its original decision in SRI International, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., vacating the district court’s award of attorneys’ fees because it was based on a now vacated...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Elbit Systems Land and C4I Ltd. v. Hughes Network Systems, LLC, Appeal No. 2018-1910 (Fed. Cir. June 25, 2019) - In this appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of...more
Federal Circuit Finds Claims Issued from Reexamination Co-Pending with Appeal Ineligible Where the Changes Did Not Affect Section 101 Eligibility - In SAP AMERICA, Inc. v. InvestPic, LLC, Appeal No. 2017-2081, the...more
Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC (No. 2017-1521, 8/27/18) (Reyna, Taranto, Chen) Reyna, J. - Vacating and remanding the PTAB’s IPR decision because the PTAB erred in not considering portions of the petitioner’s...more
Federal Circuit Summary - En Banc (excl. Chen), Opinion for the court filed by Stoll, joined by Newman, Lourie, Moore, O’Malley, Wallach, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District...more
Applications in Internet Time, LLC v. RPX Corp., Appeal Nos. 2017-1698, et al. (Fed. Cir. July 9, 2018) (unsealed July 24, 2018) In a lengthy decision on an issue of first impression, the Federal Circuit addressed the...more
On July 27, 2018, the Federal Circuit ruled that a patent applicant’s obligation to pay the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) “expenses” for district court proceedings to review patent application rejections does not...more
Medtronic, Inc. v. Mark A. Barry, Appeal Nos. 2017-1169, -1170 (Fed. Cir. June 11, 2018) - The Court affirmed-in-part and vacated-in-part a PTAB decision finding that petitioner Medtronic, Inc. had failed to prove that...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Moore, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of North Dakota. Summary: A district court must articulate a reasonable basis for denying...more
Texas Advanced Optoelectronic Solutions, Inc. v. Renesas Electronics America, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2016-2121, -2208, -2235 (Fed. Cir. 2018)?- In an appeal from a jury trial, the Federal Circuit addressed numerous issues...more
Addressing the degree to which litigation conduct can preclude the recovery of fees under 35 U.S. C. § 285, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated the denial of a fee award, finding that sloppy litigation...more