On August 27, we blogged about the Ninth Circuit unpublished panel opinion in Kivett v. Flagstar Bank issued upon remand of the case from the Supreme Court with instructions to follow the guidance of the Supreme Court...more
Without any comments, the Supreme Court has denied Juno Therapeutics’ Petition for Rehearing, which requested that the Court hold the case in abeyance pending the resolution of Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, Aventisub LLC....more
On June 15, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana that bilateral arbitration agreements governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) may require arbitration of California Private...more
At the end of 2021, the California Secretary of State approved a proposition to reform California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) by collecting signatures for the November 2022 ballot....more
Last year, a divided Ninth Circuit panel found that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) did not completely preempt Assembly Bill (AB) 51, California’s ban on mandatory arbitration agreements. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce then...more
In an unusual move, an Eleventh Circuit panel doubled down on its prior, industry-disrupting decision that a debt collector may violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) by transmitting private information to a...more
[co-author: Jay Bober, Summer Associate] The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for...more
On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court issued an Order in Emerson Elec Emerson Electric Co., Petitioner v. SIPCO, LLC, Case 19-966, stating “Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Peter v. Nantkwest, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-801 (Sup. Ct. Dec. 11, 2019) - This week the Supreme Court answered a long-simmering question concerning the extent to which a person who brings a...more
Athena Diagnostics filed a Petition for Rehearing of the CAFC decision in Athena Diagnostics v. Mayo on April 8, 2019. Amicus Briefs are due April 22, 2019. Patent Docs has reported on this decision, which continues to...more
2017 was a year filled with significant developments in case law for trademarks. The below rulings highlight some successes and obstacles faced by companies in the protection of their trademarks and their brand as a whole. ...more
A Review of 2017 Personal Jurisdiction Decisions - In 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court in cases such as BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California continued the trend that began in...more
Last summer, we wrote about a unique situation that arose in the case of Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, No. 14-1935 (7th Cir. July 19, 2016), in which the Seventh Circuit found itself unable to assemble a “majority” of...more
Last month, the Supreme Court issued a one-sentence opinion after a 4-4 split on United States v. Texas. This decision was devastating for millions of undocumented immigrants living in the United States because it left in...more
Clare v. Chrysler Group LLC (No. 2015-1999, 3/31/16) (Prost, Moore, Wallach) - Moore, J. Affirming summary judgment of non-infringement of patents related to storage compartment for pickup trucks. The Court rejected...more
On February 29, 2016, the Supreme Court declined to review a Ninth Circuit decision holding that there was no likelihood of confusion, and therefore no trademark infringement, where Amazon.com responded to consumer searches...more
By a poll of active justices, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a petition for an en banc rehearing of Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., et al. v. Sequenom, Inc. et al. and issued two concurrences and one...more
As reported previously, the Federal Circuit has denied rehearing in Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc. I wrote about Judge ‘Dyk’s opinion concurring in the denial but offering alternative views on patent eligibility...more
On December 2, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an order denying a petition for rehearing en banc in the closely watched Sequenom case. Earlier this year, on appeal from the U.S. District Court...more
Last week, Appellee Natera, Inc. filed its response to the petition for rehearing en banc filed by Appellants Sequenom, Inc. and Sequenom Center for Molecular Medicine, LLC in August (see "Sequenom Requests Rehearing En...more
On Monday, Appellee Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. filed its response to the petition for rehearing en banc filed by Appellants Sequenom, Inc. and Sequenom Center for Molecular Medicine, LLC in August. In its response, Ariosa...more
The Federal Circuit today denied the petitions for rehearing by the panel and rehearing by the en banc Court filed by both parties in Amgen v. Sandoz. Amgen had petitioned for rehearing on the panel's decision that the...more
Earlier this summer, in Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the District Court for the Northern District of California granting summary judgment of invalidity of the asserted...more