Notorious: The RBG Podcast - Episode 11: Three Cheers for Beer: A Discussion of Craig v. Boren
The M&A Word of the Day® from the Book of Jargon® – Global Mergers & Acquisitions Is Revlon Doctrine
Konczal: Dodd-Frank Reforms Get Roughed Up in Court
A federal court in New York recently ruled that an interim arbitration order was final and granted a developer’s petition to confirm the order which required the franchisor to make payments to the developer while the...more
A recent federal court decision is a victory for Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) covered entities using third-party tracking tools on unauthenticated webpages. These are websites available to the...more
Finding that a California trial court’s statement of decision was not a judgment or appealable order, the California Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, having no jurisdiction or authority to review it....more
On May 31, 2016, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., Inc. holding that approved judicial determinations as to the presence of wetlands issued by the...more
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 20, 2016 in Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee that: (1) the statutory authority of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) in instituting an inter partes review (“IPR”) proceeding is...more
On June 20th, in Cuozzo v. Lee, the Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit holding that claims should be given their broadest reasonable interpretation in inter partes review proceedings....more
On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, which unanimously upheld the “broadest reasonable construction” claim construction standard (BRI) used by the Patent Trial and...more
On June 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC v. Lee, No. 15-4461, an appeal of an institution and cancellation decision in the first-ever petition for inter partes review...more
In Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, the Supreme Court handed a victory to the Patent Office, affirming its broad discretion in the institution and management of post-issuance proceedings created by the Leahy-Smith...more
In Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, No. 15-446, the Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit’s holdings on claim construction and the scope of judicial review in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding....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
PTAB’s Institution Decision Remains Largely Unreviewable - What You Need To Know - Summary - In its first case addressing an Inter Partes Review (“IPR”), the Supreme Court’s In re Cuozzo decision unanimously...more
On May 31, 2016, in United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., the US Supreme Court unanimously held that a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) approved jurisdictional determination (JD) is a final agency action...more
Environmental and Policy Focus - U.S. Supreme Court allows pre-permit challenges to approved jurisdictional determinations - Allen Matkins - May 31 - In a major new legal development for the Clean Water Act's...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Supreme Court decided that Army Corps’ jurisdictional determinations are judicially reviewable. This decision leaves open the question of whether other types of administrative decisions are immediately...more
Introduction - On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision that continues a trend of judicial skepticism toward federal agency efforts to avoid judicial review of agency permitting and related...more
Decision allows landowners to challenge in court a US Army Corps of Engineers’ determination that a property is subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act....more
The Supreme Court of the United States ruled on May 31, 2016, in United States Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., Inc., No. 15-290, slip op., 578 U.S. ___ (2016) that approved jurisdictional determinations (JDs) issued by...more
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co., Inc., No. 15-290 (May 31, 2016) - Why It Matters: The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously concluded that property owners who are required to obtain Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404...more
On May 31, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States held that final determinations by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding the presence or absence of “waters of the United States” can be appealed to the courts. The...more
An approved jurisdictional determination (“JD”) by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) can be appealed to Federal District Court according to a unanimous United States Supreme Court decision issued May 31, 2016, U.S....more
In a major new legal development for the Clean Water Act's Section 404 wetlands permitting program, landowners can now challenge the federal government's claim that areas targeted for fill are "waters of the United States"...more
In a decision that was not a surprise based on oral argument, the Supreme Court today ruled that Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Determinations concerning “waters of the United States” are final agency action subject...more
In the Odyssey, Homer told of the inescapable sailing hazards that confronted Odysseus: the six-headed sea monster, Scylla, on one side of a strait and a whirlpool, Charybdis, on the other. Odysseus chose to avoid losing all...more