News & Analysis as of

Manufacturers Component Parts Doctrine

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Treasury Department and IRS Issue Proposed Regulations on the Advanced Manufacturing Production Credit under Section 45X of the...

The proposed regulations provide important clarity on the distinction between substantial and superficial modification for purposes of determining eligible components produced by the taxpayer, along with guidance as to...more

Snell & Wilmer

Component-Part Manufacturers Are Not Required to Indemnify Retail Sellers Under California’s Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act...

Snell & Wilmer on

The California Court of Appeal in Mega RV Corp. v. HWH Corp. (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 1318 held that component-part manufacturers are not obligated to indemnify retail sellers under California Code of Civil Procedure section...more

Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP

Product Liability 2021 Year in Review

Massachusetts federal and state courts issued several important product liability decisions in 2021. Nutter’s Product Liability practice group reviewed these cases and report on their significant holdings as follows...more

Butler Snow LLP

Navigating the Stream of Commerce: “Purposeful Availment” in the Wake of Ford

Butler Snow LLP on

We recently covered the United States Supreme Court’s troubling decision in Ford Motor Company v. Montana Eighth Judicial District Court, 141 S. Ct. 1017 (2021), which has broadened the reach of specific personal jurisdiction...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Whether Asbestos-Containing Components Were Manufactured by Third Parties No Longer Matters in New Jersey

Aligning with neighboring New York, and clearing up conflict within the Appellate Division, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled equipment manufacturers can be held strictly liable on the basis of failure to warn for...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

The Ex Post Facto Effect: The U.S. Supreme Court’s DeVries Decision And Asbestos Litigation In The United States

Fox Rothschild LLP on

Colleagues and clients frequently pose the question whether after more than forty years the asbestos litigation juggernaut has finally neared its inevitable conclusion. The United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in...more

Blank Rome LLP

The Supreme Court Adopts a Middle of the Road Approach When Deciding a Manufacturer’s Duty to Warn in the Context of Maritime Tort...

Blank Rome LLP on

On March 19, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court in Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries held that, under maritime law, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn of asbestos or other hazardous parts when its own product, although...more

Beveridge & Diamond PC

Too Much to “Bare”: US Supreme Court Rejects Bare Metal Defense Under Federal Maritime Law

In an eagerly anticipated decision by the asbestos bar, the United States Supreme Court in Air & Liquid Systems et al. v. DeVries et at., Dkt. No. 17-1104, 2019 WL 1245520 (March 19, 2019) rejected the “bare metal defense” as...more

Polsinelli

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Asbestos Defendants “Bare Metal Defense” in Maritime Cases

Polsinelli on

In Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. et al. v. DeVries et al., No. 17-1104 (March 19, 2019), the U.S. Supreme Court held that under federal maritime law, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn when its product requires the...more

Pillsbury - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real...

SCOTUS Limits “Bare Metal Defense”

On March 19, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. Devries, affirming the ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in this maritime tort case involving the availability of...more

Cozen O'Connor

SCOTUS Rejects Bare Metal Defense in Maritime Products Liability Actions Involving Asbestos Exposure

Cozen O'Connor on

On March 19, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the first case involving maritime law in several years. In Air & Liquid Systems Corp. et al v. Devries, et al, 586 US ___ (2019), Justice Kavanaugh, writing for the majority...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Narrows “Bare Metal Defense” For Maritime Asbestos Cases

Husch Blackwell LLP on

In its decision Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court held, under maritime law, that manufacturers can be held liable for injuries caused by asbestos-containing parts manufactured and added to their products by third parties. The...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. DeVries

On March 19, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. DeVries, No. 17-1104, holding that in the maritime tort context, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn when: 1) its product requires incorporation...more

Cozen O'Connor

Manufacturers Can MAN UP With Defenses to the Texas Products Liability Act: Part II, How Sellers May Find Themselves a MAN DOWN

Cozen O'Connor on

On September 11, 2018, Cozen O’Connor’s Product Liability Prevention and Defense (“PLPD”) blog provided a quick reference guide that manufacturers can consult to MAN UP on defenses when hit with a claim under Chapter 82 in...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

United States Supreme Court To Consider The Bare Metal Defense

Husch Blackwell LLP on

The United States Supreme Court granted a petition for certiorari in Air and Liquid Systems Corp. et al. v. Devries et al. and is set to wade into the fiercely contested waters surrounding the bare metal defense under...more

Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP

Product Liability: 2017 Year in Review

Massachusetts state and federal courts issued a number of important product liability decisions in 2017. The Product Liability and Toxic Tort Litigation Group at Nutter recently reviewed these cases. Highlighted below are...more

Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP

Supreme Court Patent Ruling on Global Exportation of Component Parts

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp. raises important issues regarding the extraterritorial effect of patent law on global supply chains. The primary issue in the case is whether the...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Remand to District Court to Attempt to Identify “Article of Manufacture” for Design Patent Damages

Addressing the design patent battle between Apple and Samsung on remand from the Supreme Court of the United States, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit declined to apply the new standard or to order specific...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Decision Limits Extraterritorial Reach of U.S. Patents: What Manufacturers and Exporters Need to Know

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision on February 22, in Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp. limits the ability of a U.S. patent to cover infringing activity abroad. In particular, the Court held that a single component of a...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Substantially Devalues Design Patent Damages on Multicomponent Products: What Design Patent Holders Need to...

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court in a unanimous 8-0 opinion reversed and remanded to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit an award to Apple, Inc. of $399 million of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.'s total profits on...more

Burr & Forman

Samsung Secures 8-0 Win in the Supreme Court Reversing Apple's $400 Million Damage Award

Burr & Forman on

The Supreme Court of the United States handed Samsung a victory yesterday by reversing a $400 million judgment previously won by Apple for infringement of several of Apple's design patents. In a unanimous 8-0 decision, the...more

Clark Hill PLC

Apple v. Samsung – A Smartphone is More than Just a Pretty Face

Clark Hill PLC on

Since their initial release, smartphones have been a hot commodity with intense competition. One particularly contentious issue has been their appearance. During early development, Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) obtained several...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Litigation Alert: A Unanimous Supreme Court Reverses Federal Circuit Ruling on Damages in Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc.

Fenwick & West LLP on

On December 6, 2016, in a unanimous opinion written by Justice Sotomayor, the Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s affirmance of the damages award in Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc. The question before the...more

Knobbe Martens

U.S. Supreme Court Overturns Apple's $400M Award Against Samsung

Knobbe Martens on

A Unanimous U.S. Supreme Court Pulls Back the Reach of Damages Awards for Design Patents Summary The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, December 6, 2016, unanimously held that damages awards for design patent infringement need...more

Snell & Wilmer

Supreme Court Dismantles $400M Apple Design Patent Award Against Samsung

Snell & Wilmer on

In Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc., the Supreme Court of the United States today reversed the Federal Circuit’s decision upholding Apple Inc.’s nearly $400 million design patent award against Samsung Electronics Co.,...more

28 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide