Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Demise of the Chevron Doctrine – Part I
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Cantero Opinion: The Supreme Court Leaves National Bank Preemption in Limbo
In That Case: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
Regulatory Uncertainty: Benefits-Related Legal Challenges in a Post-Chevron World — Troutman Pepper Podcast
In That Case: Department of State v. Muñoz
The End of Chevron Deference: Implications of the Supreme Court's Loper Bright Decision — The Consumer Finance Podcast
In That Case: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy
In That Case: Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP
Down Goes Chevron: A 40-Year Precedent Overturned by the Supreme Court – Diagnosing Health Care
#WorkforceWednesday® - Chevron Deference Overturned - Employment Law This Week®
In That Case: Cantero v. Bank of America
Early Returns Podcast with Jan Baran - Josh Gerstein: SCOTUS, the Presidential Immunity Case Fallout, and the Dobbs Case Leak Investigation
DE Under 3: Retirement of “Chevron Doctrine” Exposed Vulnerability of OFCCP’s Overreaching Interpretations of Some of its Rules
AGG Talks: Healthcare Insights Podcast - Episode 5: What the End of Agency Deference Means for the Healthcare Industry
SCOTUS and federal court rulings on TTAB decisions on granting trademarks and trademark renewals; Netflix settling an anticipated defamation case with a disclaimer and donation
DE Under 3: OFCCP Must Shut Down its Administrative Court Prosecutions as a Result of SCOTUS’ SEC Jury Trial Case Decision
The Briefing: Supreme Court Holds Copyright Damages Can Go Beyond 3 Years (Podcast)
The Briefing: Supreme Court Holds Copyright Damages Can Go Beyond 3 Years
SCOTUS Limits Availability of Injunctions in NLRB Unfair Labor Practice Cases - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS applies the "discovery rule" in timely copyright infringement claim; Cher wins in Marital Settlement Agreement vs Copyright Grant Termination Notices; Student Athletes Win Revenue Share and NIL
On February 25, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Monasky v. Taglieri, holding that the determination of a child’s “habitual residence” for purposes of the Hague Convention depends on a totality-of-the-circumstances...more
On June 21, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided Flowers v. Mississippi, No. 17-9572, holding that the state court committed clear error in concluding that the state’s peremptory strike of a black prospective juror...more
A recent grant of certiorari will determine whether formality should prevail over the reality of what the trial court unquestionably knows. On June 3, 2019, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Holguin-Hernandez v. United...more
In U.S. Bank N.A. v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision on standards of appellate review, holding that appellate courts should review a bankruptcy court’s determination of whether a...more
Last April, we updated you that the Supreme Court had granted review of In re The Village at Lakeridge, LLC, 814 F.3d 993 (9th Cir. 2016). ...more
In U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC, No. 15-1509, 2018 U.S. LEXIS 1520 (Mar. 5, 2018), the Supreme Court analyzed the appropriate standard of review for appellate courts reviewing a bankruptcy court’s...more
In U.S. Capital Bank N.A. v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC, No. 15-1509 (U.S. Mar. 5, 2018), the U.S. Supreme Court held that an appellate court should apply a deferential standard of review to a bankruptcy court's decision as to...more
In another decision affecting Chapter 11 cases, U.S. Bank National Association v. Village at Lakeridge, --- S. Ct. ---, 2018 WL 1143822 (2018), on March 5, 2018, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision,...more
On March 5, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC, No 15-1509, holding that a bankruptcy court’s determination of whether a set of facts demonstrated an arms-length...more
After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its ninth annual list of top patent stories. For 2015, we identified twenty stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe...more
In early 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court changed the standard of review for patent claim construction with its decision in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz Inc., 135 S. Ct. 831 (2015) (Teva I). Previously, the U.S. Court of...more
FEDERAL CIRCUIT CASES - CAFC: If (No Factual Findings), Then (No Deference) - Two days ago, on remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit in Shire v. Watson again affirmed its reversal of the...more
SUPREME COURT CASES - U.S. Supreme Court Remands Case to Federal Circuit to Review Patent Under Teva - On April 20, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court remanded a case back to the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Federal...more
Case Name: Teva Pharms USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 10-13-854, 135 S. Ct. 831 (Mar. 20, 2012) (Breyer, J. delivered opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C.J., and Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ.,...more
The recent Supreme Court case of Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. held that, although the ultimate issue of claim construction is a legal question subject to de novo review, underlying factual determinations...more
TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS: IS IT TIME TO RETHINK HOW YOU WILL ARGUE CLAIM CONSTRUCTION? The United States Supreme Court decided in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. that the Federal Circuit must review all...more
On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court provided guidance on the standard of review for claim construction on appeal in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 12-854. The Court held “[w]hen reviewing a district...more
More Deference to District Courts in Claim Construction - In TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. v. SANDOZ, INC., No. 13-854, the Supreme Court held that factual findings underpinning claim construction rulings are reviewed...more
In a 7–2 decision penned by Justice Breyer, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the de novo standard as the sole standard of review issues arising in claim construction. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. Sandoz,...more
The Supreme Court recently handed down its 7-2 opinion in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. The case involved a Federal Circuit review of a district court’s determination that Teva’s patent claims were not...more
On January 26, 2015, the Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated, and remanded Shire Development LLC v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., to the Federal Circuit “for further consideration in light of Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,...more
Recently, the Supreme Court changed the standard of review the Federal Circuit must use when reviewing district court claim construction decisions in patent cases. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 574 U.S. ___...more
On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision on the standard of review of factual findings by the trial court in construing patent claims. The Court ruled that factual findings in the context of...more
On January 21, 2015, the Supreme Court decided a narrow but important issue of appellate jurisdiction in cases that have been consolidated for pretrial proceedings by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. A...more
On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. (Case No. 13-854), which changed the level of deference the Federal Circuit must show to district court claim...more