5 Key Takeaways | SALT and Multinational Businesses: Analyzing State and Local Taxation of Foreign Company Transactions
On January 21, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a decision in Trinseo Europe GmbH v. Kellogg Brown & Root, L.L.C., et al that has massive implications for those prosecuting or defending trade...more
In a case that should stand as a strong reminder to apportion your damages whenever possible, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a significant post‑trial ruling in Trinseo Europe GmbH v. Harper, et al., upholding the...more
In Rex Medical, L.P., v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc. (“Rex”), the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court’s reduction of a jury award from $10 million to $1. At trial, with no damages experts testifying, a jury awarded $10...more
Rex Medical, L.P. v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Case No. 24-1072 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 2, 2025) - The Federal Circuit’s opinion in Rex Medical, L.P. v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc. underscores the judiciary’s strict insistence on...more
On October 2, 2025, in Rex Medical, LP v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Nos. 2024-1072, 2024-1125, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's preclusion of Rex's patent damages expert from...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court decision excluding a damages expert’s testimony and reducing a jury’s $10 million damages award to nominal damages. The Court found that the plaintiff...more
On May 21, 2025, the Federal Circuit “reverse[d] the district court’s denial of Google’s motion and remand[ed] for a new trial on damages.” The decision resulted in an 8-2 vote, with Judges Reyna and Stark dissenting. The...more
Over the last several years, the Federal Circuit has increasingly scrutinized patent litigants’ reliance on “comparable licenses” as a means for calculating a reasonable royalty, including whether the license needs to be...more
On March 24, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) issued an opinion affirming a district court’s judgement of infringement while vacating and remanding the district court’s damages...more
In a trade secret misappropriation action, a complainant is required to prove the amount of its damages with reasonable certainty and that this amount has been caused by the misappropriation. Therefore, the trade secret...more
The United States patent system is designed to be a balance: in exchange for the inventor disclosing their invention to the public, pa-tentees are granted exclusive rights to that invention for a period of time. This ensures...more
Webjet Linhas Aereas S.A. etc., et al. v. ZGA Aircraft Leasing, Inc., 49 Fla. Weekly D620a (Fla. 3rd DCA 2024) - On March 20, 2024, the Third District Court of Appeal rendered a decision concerning the characterization of a...more
EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 2023-1101 (Fed. Cir. June 3, 2024) In the Federal Circuit’s only precedential patent opinion this week, the court addressed issues of infringement and admissibility that arose...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court decision correcting a clerical error in a claim. Pavo Solutions LLC v. Kingston Technology Company, Inc., Case Nos. 21-1834 (Fed. Cir. June 3, 2022)...more
Examining whether portfolio patent licenses can be sufficiently comparable to a single-patent license for the purposes of supporting a patent damages verdict, a split panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit...more
Omega Patents, LLC, v. CalAmp Corp., Appeal Nos. 2020-1793, -1794, (Fed. Cir. Sept. 14, 2021) - In its only precedential patent case this week, the Federal Circuit sent a case back for a third trial on the issue of...more
On August 26, in MCL Intellectual Property, LLC v. Micron Technology, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed exclusion of an expert opinion regarding a reasonable royalty, holding that the district court did not abuse its...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision to preclude a damage expert from characterizing license agreements and opining on a reasonable royalty rate where the sponsoring party...more
MLC Intellectual Property, LLC v. Micron Technology, Inc., Appeal No. 2020-1413 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 26, 2021) - For those interested in an important Section 112 written description case, we recommend reading the Juno...more
The Supreme Court of Georgia issued another decision in its recent line of cases opining on the scope and availability of Georgia’s apportionment statute - O.C.G.A. § 51-12-13. This latest decision, Alston & Bird, LLP v....more
Rejecting a defendant’s request for a new trial on a variety of grounds, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a damages award and explained that apportionment was unnecessary because a sufficiently...more
The Georgia Supreme Court recently issued a decision impacting all product liability cases in Georgia by finding that Georgia’s apportionment statute—O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33—applies to claims for strict product liability, and as...more
The Facts: Goreham v. Martins, No. SJC 12761, 2020 WL 3407710 (Mass. June 22, 2020) - On a cold day in January 2010, Robert Goreham exited his apartment through the rear fire escape and walked down the building’s driveway...more
On April 22, 2020, the Federal Circuit "grappled," as the opinion put it, with the equitable doctrine of assignor estoppel in Hologic, Inc. v. Minerva Surgical, Inc., the Federal Circuit "grappled," as the opinion put it,...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants’ motion for a new trial on damages, finding that the jury verdict on damages was based on...more