All Things Investigations: Episode 37 – Privileges in Document Production with Mike Huneke
Sitting with the C-Suite: eDiscovery Observations – Historical Lookback to 1990s and 2000s
So you are ready to divorce...what is the process?
Sitting with the C-Suite: In-House Counsel - Leveraging Text Classification to Problem Solve
Video | Tips for Managing the Preservation of Mobile Device Data
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Government Investigative Demands
BYOD (Bring Your Own Device)... *Liability and Data Breach Sold Separately
United States Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron (S.D.N.Y.) recently granted a motion by Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (collectively “Samsung”) to compel non-party Microchip Technology...more
3: Preparing Your Inside Team - Preservation, Privilege, Potential Pitfalls -This is the third in a series of articles that explores considerations and suggested actions for in-house counsel who are inexperienced in patent...more
The Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up for October 2023 covers three decisions addressing the scope of the work-product and attorney-client privileges, limits on the use of a defendant’s use of its own patents during...more
On August 8, 2023, Judge Katharine H. Parker (S.D.N.Y.) denied Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited’s (“Spectrum”) motion to compel the production of documents that it argued fell under the crime-fraud exception to the...more
As previously reported, the Federal Court found Janssen’s Canadian Patent No. 2,661,422 (422 patent)—which relates to treatment of prostate cancer in humans by co-administration of abiraterone acetate (Janssen’s ZYTIGA) and...more
The Federal Circuit affirmed a district court award of over $360,000 in costs and attorneys’ fees against a non-practicing entity, citing the need “to deter future abusive litigation.” In October 2016, Blackbird sued...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently issued an Order that illustrates the circumstances in which a party may obtain additional discovery in an inter partes review (IPR). In Apple Inc. v. Singapore Asahi Chemical...more
A recent order from International Trade Commission Administrative Law Judge Elliott provides helpful guidance regarding a common ITC discovery dispute: whether a party may withhold from discovery as work product pre-suit test...more
In Limestone Memory Systems LLC v. Micron Technology, Inc. et al., the Discovery Master ruled that, under 9th Circuit law, pre-suit, patent analysis documents qualified for immunity from discovery under the work product...more
By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in TC Technology LLC v. Sprint Corp. et al., Civil Action 16-153-RGA (D.Del. December 13, 2018), the Court granted-in-part and denied-in-part defendants’ motion...more
The First Circuit recently joined the slight majority of its sister Circuits by holding that neither party bears the burden of proof with respect to the discretionary factors analyzed on an application for discovery in aid of...more
Judge Vince Chhabria of the Northern District of California handed down a strongly worded order denying a motion to seal alleged trade secret information, and sanctioning counsel for defendant for the frivolous request. ...more
This post is part of a monthly series summarizing notable activity in patent litigation in the District of Massachusetts, including short summaries of substantive orders issued in pending cases. Ethicon sued Covidien...more
Plaintiff seeks core technical documents regarding certain accused products that are in the possession of defendant’s foreign affiliates. He court finds that plaintiff has not demonstrated defendant’s control over the...more
Fallon, M. J. Plaintiff’s motion to compel documents is granted in part and denied in part. Its motion to correct and amend its motion to compel is denied as moot. Its motion to amend its complaint is denied as moot. Its...more
Permobil Inc. v. Pridemobility Products Corp. - Addressing a patent owner's motion to compel a petitioner to produce documents concerning petitioner’s alleged copying in an inter partes review (IPR), the U.S. Patent...more
Defendant Ablexis requested that the court compel the production of documents associated with the prosecution of non-U.S. patent applications related to the patent-in-suit. The court said that a defendant’s statement that the...more