Supreme Court of the United States Damages

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
News & Analysis as of

Statistical Modeling in Class Actions: The U.S. Supreme Court Weighs in, Kind of

A U.S. Supreme Court decision expected to potentially change (or at least clarify) the rules on the hot-button issue of statistical modeling in class actions ended up turning much more on case law specific to the Fair Labor...more

The Class Action Chronicle - Spring 2016

This is the 11th edition of The Class Action Chronicle, a quarterly publication that provides an analysis of recent class action trends, along with a summary of class certification and Class Action Fairness Act rulings issued...more

Supreme Court Rejects Maryland Power Plant Subsidies, But Signals Permissible Ways for States to Incentivize New Plants

In recent years, Maryland attempted to subsidize new power plants by guaranteeing prices for generating capacity at wholesale auctions administered by PJM Interconnection L.L.C. (PJM). Tuesday, the Supreme Court unanimously...more

Supreme Court Decides Bank Markazi v. Peterson

On April 20, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Bank Markazi v. Peterson, No. 14-770, holding that Congress did not unconstitutionally infringe on the role of the judiciary when it passed the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria...more

The Supreme Court - April 2016 #3

The Supreme Court of the United States issued decisions in two cases on April 19, 2016: Hughes v. Talen Energy Marketing, LLC, No. 14-614: Congress, though the Federal Power Act (“FPA”), 16 U.S.C. §791a et seq., vested...more

Supreme Court Decides to Hear Samsung v. Apple, Appears Ready to Weigh-In on Patent Damage Calculations

This week, in Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc., No. 15-777, the Supreme Court granted Samsung’s petition for certiorari and agreed to hear the case about Apple’s smartphone design patents in its upcoming term. This will...more

The Supreme Court - March 2016 #3

The Supreme Court of the United States issued one per curiam decision on March 21, 2016: Caetano v. Massachusetts, No. 14-10078: Massachusetts enacted a law prohibiting the possession of stun guns. That law was upheld...more

Environmental Notes - March 2016

U.S. Supreme Court to Decide Whether Jurisdictional Determinations May be Appealed - The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers determines the presence or absence of wetlands and other “waters of the United States” on a...more

Synopsys Win is a Win for Copyright

Static timing analysis (STA) is a simulation method of computing the expected timing of a digital circuit without requiring a simulation of the full circuit. This complicated area of measuring effective timing and power...more

Design Patents – Unlocking the Value of The User Experience

The oft-overlooked design patent has seen somewhat of a revival recently (at least in the media) ever since a jury in California awarded Apple $399 million in damages — i.e., all Samsung profits from the sale of several of...more

Trolls v. Pirates: Supreme Court Oral Argument Reviewing Enhanced Damages

Earlier today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two related cases: Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. (Supreme Court docket number 14-1513) and Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer, Inc. (Supreme Court docket...more

FTC Amicus Brief Confirms Need for Independent Proof of Causation in Private Reverse-Payment Antitrust Cases

In the ongoing battles over the antitrust treatment of pharmaceutical patent settlements, the Federal Trade Commission and private industry have not agreed on much. But a recent FTC amicus brief appears to signal a high level...more

Product Liability Update: January 2016

Supreme Court Holds Defendant Cannot Moot Putative Class Action by Making Unaccepted Offer of Judgment for Complete Relief to Representative Plaintiff - In Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, No. 14-857, 2016 U.S. LEXIS 846 (S....more

Defendants Summary Judgment Motion in In re Cathode Ray Tube Antitrust Litigation May Illuminate Policy Justifications Behind...

Earlier this month, defendants in the In re Cathode Ray Tube Antitrust Litigation moved to challenge the standing of major retailers to pursue damages claims under the Supreme Court’s 1977 Illinois Brick decision. LG...more

The Magic 8 Ball Says – The Supreme Court’s Montanile Decision and The Seemingly Random Evolution of Supreme Court ERISA Remedies...

It’s a common fact pattern. A plan participant is injured and received benefits for treatment of his injuries. The participant then sues a third party for damages based on his injuries. The plan then seeks to recover a...more

Supreme Court to Address IPR Proceedings & Willful Infringement

The Supreme Court will continue to shape patent law in 2016, addressing critical components of the widely-popular Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and examining the standard for...more

The “Smart Phone” Wars – Episode VII: Will the Force of the Supreme Court Awaken?

Design patents protect the ornamental features of utilitarian objects, that is, the uniqueness of aesthetic features, form, or configuration of products. Design patents can be a significant weapon in the intellectual...more

MoFo IP Newsletter - January 2016

Highlights of 2015 and What to Watch in 2016 in The United States - Commil USA, llC v. CiSCo SyStemS, inC. (Supreme Court, may 26, 2015). In May, the Supreme Court held that a good faith belief that an asserted patent...more

Lost-Profits Damages Available Despite 50 Percent Price Disparity - Akamai Techs., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that lost-profits damages were available in a situation where the accused product sold for half the price of the patentee’s product, and consequently remanded the case...more

Smartphone Wars – The Supreme Court Awakens: Samsung Files Petition for Certiorari in New Hope to Harmonize Design Patent Law

On December 14, 2015, in the latest episode of the smartphone wars, Samsung filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court. Samsung is appealing a Federal Circuit decision that upheld a $399 million judgment against...more

Supreme Court to Review Federal Circuit Standard for Treble Damage Awards Under § 284 - Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse...

Taking its first IP cases of the current session, the Supreme Court has granted certiorari in two § 284 enhanced fee award patent cases: Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., S.Ct. No. 14-1513 (Oct. 19, 2015) and...more

“Raging Bull” and the Patent Act: Laches Still Available in Patent Cases - SCA Hygiene Products AB et al. v. First Quality Baby...

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit convened an en banc panel to examine the Supreme Court’s “Raging Bull” decision in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. in the context of deciding whether laches remains a...more

Supreme Court To Review Federal Circuit Test for Willful Patent Infringement

The U.S. Supreme Court will review the Federal Circuit’s test for determining willful patent infringement at the request of two patent holders that assert that the two-part test is too rigid and conflicts with the recent...more

SCOTUS to Hear a Duo on Willful Patent Infringement

On Monday, October 19, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to hear two patent infringement cases on the issue of willfulness. The first case is Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer Inc. and the second one is Halo Elecs., Inc....more

Supreme Court to review willful infringement (Halo and Stryker cases)

Today, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in two patent cases to review the standard for willful infringement. The two cases, consolidated for review, are Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., et al., No....more

105 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 5
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"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:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×