News & Analysis as of

Substantial Evidence Standard Standard of Review

Downey Brand LLP

Court of Appeal Finds Substantial Evidence Supports City’s Use of Statutory Exemption to Approve a Zoning Overlay District For...

Downey Brand LLP on

In Lucas v. City of Pomona (2023) 92 Cal.App.5th 508, the Second District of the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s decision that the City of Pomona’s (“City”) application of the statutory exemption under CEQA...more

Downey Brand LLP

Standard of Review Surprise: Fair Argument Applies Despite Prior Program EIR According to Fourth District

Downey Brand LLP on

On June 23rd, the Fourth District published Save Our Access v. City of San Diego (2023) 92 Cal.App.5th 819, holding that a city’s approval of a ballot measure to remove the 30-foot Coastal Zone height limit in a community...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson - The LHD/ERISA Advisor

The LHD/ERISA Advisor – June 2021: Sixth Circuit Upholds Denial of Accidental Death Benefits Under "Substantial Factor" Test

In Duncan v. Minnesota Life Ins. Co., 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 4069 (6th Cir. Feb. 10, 2021), the Sixth Circuit held that an insurer properly denied accidental death benefits on the grounds that a patient's leukemia caused the...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Garland v. Ming Dai

On June 1, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Garland v. Ming Dai, overruling the Ninth Circuit’s longstanding “deemed-true-or-credible” rule that required reviewing courts to treat noncitizens’ testimony as credible and...more

Haug Partners LLP

Teaching Away and No Reasonable Expectation of Success Arguments Insufficient to Avoid Obviousness Affirmance by the Federal...

Haug Partners LLP on

In Trustees of Columbia University v. Illumina, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB” or “Board”) decision to invalidate five patents owned by Columbia,...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Left Coast Appeals

This Week at the Ninth: Sports, Drugs, and Pensions

This week, we take a look at two Ninth Circuit decisions concerning the employer-employee relationship.  In the first, the Court let the lawsuit against the NFL for its negligent handling of drug distribution to its injured...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson - The LHD/ERISA Advisor

The LHD/ERISA Advisor: First Circuit Holds Decision to Deny Accidental Death and Dismemberment Benefits Not an Abuse of Discretion

In Arruda v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co., 951 F.3d 12, 13 (1st Cir. 2020), the First Circuit held that a claims administrator's decision to deny accidental death and dismemberment benefits was not an abuse of discretion where...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

The LHD/ERISA Advisor: Courts Say Abuse of Discretion Standard is "Highly Deferential" to Plan Administrator's Denial of Benefits

In Rittinger v. Healthy Alliance Life Ins. Co., 914 F.3d 952 (5th Cir. Jan. 31, 2019), and Roebuck v. USAble Life, 380 F. Supp. 3d 852 (E.D. Ark. Mar. 30, 2019), the courts found no abuse of discretion where the ERISA plan...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - November 2019: The Board's Reliance on Expert's Conclusory Statements May Not Meet Substantial...

In a recent precedential decision, TQ Delta, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed a pair of USPTO inter partes review proceedings that invalidated all claims of two related U.S. patents because “the...more

Perkins Coie

CEQA Year In Review 2018

Perkins Coie on

A Summary of Published Appellate Opinions Under the California Environmental Quality Act - The California Supreme Court issued its only CEQA opinion of 2018 at the end of the year. In Sierra Club v. County of Fresno, the...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB Holding of No Interference in Fact in CRISPR Interference, Leaving Both Sides Free to License Their...

On September 10, 2018, the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determining that there was no interference in fact between the University of California’s (“UC”) U.S. Patent...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - January 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Where Parties Raise an Actual Dispute Regarding Claim Scope, the Court Must Resolve It In Nobelbiz, Inc. v. Global Connect, L.L.C., Appeal Nos. 2016-1104, 2016-1105, the Federal Circuit held that where parties raise an actual...more

Knobbe Martens

Microsoft Corporation v. Biscotti, Inc.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Newman, O’Malley, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Anticipation is not proven by multiple, distinct teachings in a single prior art document that a...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

In Allied v. OSMI, the Circuit affirms dismissal of a declaratory judgment action even though Allied’s Mexican distributors had been sued in Mexico on a corresponding Mexican patent. In a first Waymo v. Uber case, the panel...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Supreme Court of California Ruling Elevates Responsible Agency Role Under CEQA - City's EIR Erred by Failing to Fully Disclose and...

Holland & Knight LLP on

In Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach, et al., the Supreme Court of California held that lead agencies need to expressly disclose and consider the jurisdictional claims and regulatory opinions of responsible...more

Goodwin

Merck v. Gnosis: Standard of Review of Factual Findings in IPRs

Goodwin on

We post frequently about IPRs here on the blog, because they are an efficient and relatively quick way to get a decision on validity of the patents that cover drugs, biologic or otherwise. In Merck & Cie v. Gnosis S.p.A.,...more

Latham & Watkins LLP

California Supreme Court Addresses CEQA Supplemental Review; Rejects “New Project” Test

Latham & Watkins LLP on

Recent decision resolves appellate split regarding standard of review for agency decision to prepare supplemental environmental review. On September 19, the California Supreme Court held that the substantial evidence...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

California Supreme Court Rejects "New Project" Test In High Profile CEQA Suit

“Enough already!” Reading between the lines, this is what a seemingly exasperated California Supreme Court appears to be saying in its latest California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) decision?Friends of the College of...more

Allen Matkins

California Supreme Court Rejects "New Project" Test for Modifications to Previously Approved Projects

Allen Matkins on

On September 19, 2016, the California Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in Friends of the College of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo Community College District (Case No. S214061). The Supreme Court held that...more

Beveridge & Diamond PC

“New and Improved” is Not Always a Good Slogan Under CEQA

Beveridge & Diamond PC on

Marketing departments in major corporations love to describe products as “new and improved” in order to convince you that the product is something you need. In many cases though, you already have the product; the new and...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

In re Aqua Products, Inc. -- CAFC Grants Rehearing En Banc to Consider PTAB Motions to Amend

On Friday, August 13, 2016, the Federal Circuit granted a petition for rehearing en banc filed in the In re Aqua Products, Inc. case to consider two questions related to the PTAB's treatment of Motions to Amend in IPR...more

Latham & Watkins LLP

California Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument in Friends of the College of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County (Case No. S214061)

Latham & Watkins LLP on

On May 4, 2016, the California Supreme Court heard oral argument in Friends of the College of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County Community College District (Case No. S214061), which addresses the standard of review that...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Federal Circuit Says It's Required to Accord the PTAB Deference Until Instructed Otherwise by...

On Tuesday, April 26, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued an order denying a petition filed by Merck & Cie for rehearing en banc of an Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) final written decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

PTAB Trial Standard Of Review Requires Affirmance Despite Contrary Evidence

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Merck & Cie v. Gnosis S.p.A., the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that held the challenged claims obvious in an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding. Although the...more

24 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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