Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 274: Listen and Learn -- UCC Expectation Damages (Contracts)
Viaje al Pasado Legal: Una Reclamación en Piedra
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 213: Listen and Learn -- Material Breach vs. Minor Breach (Contracts)
Law Brief®: Rich Schoenstein and Robert Heim Discuss Musk v. Twitter
4 Key Takeaways | The Future of Construction, Infrastructure and Energy Disputes in the Endemic Age
It’s Lit? Insight into the Increase in Cannabis-Related Litigation in California
Is There Liability for Terminating Contracts Related to Russia?
Basics of a Healthcare Contract: When Do You Actually Have One and What Happens if It's Breached?
Beyond Regulations: Hospice Business Contracts and Contract Disputes
Podcast - The Briefing from the IP Law Blog: Say NFT Again – I Dare You: Miramax Sues Quentin Tarantino Over Plans to Sell “Pulp Fiction” NFT
The Briefing from the IP Law Blog: Say NFT Again – I Dare You: Miramax Sues Quentin Tarantino Over Plans to Sell “Pulp Fiction” NFT
Monthly Minute | Global Supply Chain Issues
Protect Your Construction Project: Top 10 Insurance Provisions to Know
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 119: Listen and Learn -- Anticipatory Repudiation (Contracts)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 95: Listen and Learn -- Promissory Estoppel
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 93: Listen and Learn -- Constructive Eviction
AF COVID-19 Podcast: Mediation & Force Majeure
Blakes Continuity Podcast: Litigation Fever – Part I: What Lies Ahead?
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 245: Listen and Learn -- Promissory Estoppel
K&L Gates Triage: Reading the Fine Print: A Closer Look at the Proposed Regulation over Arbitration Clauses in Long-Term Care Resident Agreements
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - 1. PARKERVISION, INC. v. VIDAL [OPINION] (2022-1548, 12/15/2023) (Prost, Wallach, and Chen)* - Chen, J. The Court affirmed the PTAB’s determination that the patent...more
On September 9, 2020, Judge Richard G. Andrews of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware ruled in favor of Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. in the case Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. v. Mylan...more
One of the banes of any practicing patent attorney's professional existence is counseling clients on licensing agreements where the parties attempt to avoid setting forth definitive terms on contract provisions regarding...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court decision that retained jurisdiction over a breach of contract action, finding that the action did not sufficiently implicate issues of patent law and...more
FRAUNHOFER-GESELLSCHAFT v. SIRIUS XM RADIO INC. Before Dyk, Linn, and Taranto. Appeal from the District of Delaware. Summary: Contract interpretation must be applied in determining whether a sublicense survives...more
A recent decision in the Eastern District of Texas should provide standard-essential patent (“SEP”) owners with more clarity and optimism when negotiating SEP licenses. Coming on the heels of Judge Koh’s decision in the FTC’s...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed denial of a licensee’s motion for a new trial, finding that there was no error in awarding damages to the plaintiff/licensor for the licensee’s failure to pay royalties...more
On February 15, a Texas federal jury found that Ericsson did not breach its obligation to offer HTC licenses to its standard-essential patents (SEPs) on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. The verdict ended...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Dyk, Taranto, and Stoll. Appeal from U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: The Federal Circuit lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a district court judgment...more
On October 26, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States (“SCOTUS”) granted certiorari in two IP cases. In Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC, SCOTUS will address a circuit split on the effect bankruptcy...more
In an application of 2017 U.S. Supreme Court precedent in Impressions Products, Inc. v. Lexmark Intern., Inc., the Northern District California in International Fruit Genetics LLC v. Orcharddepot.com, No. 4:17-cv-02905-JSW,...more
The U.S. Supreme Court at the end of the past term handed down a decision, Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc., that greatly expanded the doctrine of patent exhaustion. This equitable doctrine prevents a...more
The public version of ALJ Shaw’s Initial Determination (ID) in U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) investigation Certain Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1012 (1012...more
Eastern District Heavyweight Bout Ends in Stunning Trademark Technical Knockout - Floyd Mayweather and Connor McGregor's late-August 2017 matchup may be the most highly anticipated boxing event in decades. But while "The...more
In 1628, Lord Coke in his “Institutes of the laws of England” summarized the common law on restraints on the alienation of chattels stating that any attempt by a seller to restrict resale or use of the chattel after selling...more
In a nearly unanimous opinion issued recently, the U.S. Supreme Court held “a patentee’s decision to sell a product exhausts all of its patent rights in that item, regardless of any restrictions the patentee purports to...more
In Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, No. 15–1189, 137 S. Ct. ___, 2017 WL 2322830 (May 30, 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a patentee’s sale of a product exhausts all of its U.S. patent rights in...more
The Supreme Court last week issued its long-awaited decision regarding patent exhaustion in Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International. The decision, which overturns longstanding Federal Circuit precedent, curtails...more
In Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc., the Supreme Court held that after a patent holder sells a patented product, the patent holder cannot control the product by way of patent rights. United States...more
Manufacturers have long used patents, licenses and litigation to deter competitive products and restrict secondary markets in their products. The U.S. Supreme Court just dealt these practices a severe blow, confirming that a...more
Although U.S. patent law has long-established limits on enforcement after a patented product has been sold, the technological innovations may put a bulls-eye on the automotive industry for patent litigation. However, when...more
On May 30, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc. that “patent exhaustion is uniform and automatic” and that patent exhaustion applies, both domestically (in an 8-0...more
The United States Supreme Court in Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc., held that patent owner’s decision to sell a product exhausts all of its patent rights in that item, regardless of any restrictions...more
Reversing long-standing Federal Circuit precedent, the United States Supreme Court has now held that a patentee extinguishes its patent rights on a product upon its sale of that product, regardless of (1) whether the patentee...more
In keeping with recent erosion of patent rights, patent owners’ power to control the post-sale use and sale of their patented products was severely limited this week by the U.S. Supreme Court in the highly anticipated case...more