In That Case: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy
The Justice Insiders Podcast: Jarkesy’s Implications for the Administrative State
5 Key Takeaways | ITC Litigation and Enforcement Conference
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Episode 18 | Unpacking the Packing: A Perspective on the Efforts to Expand the Supreme Court
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS Watch: The ACA and Key Health Law Areas Justice Barrett Could Impact - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Polsinelli Podcasts - Supreme Court Closes Gap on Bankruptcy Issue
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit held that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) violated AT&T's Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial and right to adjudication by an Article III court when...more
Key Takeaways - - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated a $57 million fine levied by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) against AT&T. - The court ruled the FCC's in-house enforcement proceedings...more
The Fifth Circuit on April 17 vacated a $57 million FCC forfeiture against AT&T, ruling the agency violated the company’s Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial under the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in SEC v. Jarkesy. ...more
A federal appeals court will soon decide whether the Department of Labor (DOL) may impose financial penalties on employers for alleged violations of the H-2A temporary visa program. While a lower court rejected a family-owned...more
On October 4, 2024, Asbury Automotive Group, a Fortune 500 company and one of the largest automobile dealer groups in the United States, sued the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to enjoin as unconstitutional the FTC’s...more
In “Case” You Missed It is a new column by Balch & Bingham attorney Tripp DeMoss that briefly summarizes a recently issued decision by higher courts like the U.S. Supreme Court and Alabama Supreme Court in cases of interest...more
The Supreme Court on June 27 issued its opinion in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy in which it held that when the SEC seeks civil penalties against a defendant for securities fraud, the Seventh Amendment...more
In a landmark decision issued last week, SEC v. Jarkesy, the Supreme Court held that the Seventh Amendment guarantees a defendant a jury trial when the SEC seeks civil penalties against the defendant for committing securities...more
A panel of the D.C. Circuit recently relied on Lucia and Cochran to enjoin a FINRA regulatory enforcement action pending appeal of an Appointments Clause challenge....more
The FTC and SEC have their own administrative dispute resolution regime, presided over by their own administrative judges (“ALJs”). Until now, those regimes were virtually immune from attack on a constitutional basis, because...more
In April 2018, the Supreme Court issued Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, 138 S. Ct. 1365, and SAS Institute v. Iancu, 138 S. Ct. 1348, a highly anticipated pair of decisions concerning post-grant...more
In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, the Supreme Court ruled that inter partes reviews (IPRs) do not improperly divest the courts of their judicial authority and do not violate the Seventh...more
Here are our picks for the top five most significant legal developments of 2018 that may impact the biosimilar industry: 1. New Law Requiring FTC/DOJ Review Of Biosimilar Patent Litigation Settlements - With the...more
In light of the Supreme Court of the United States decision in SAS Institute v. Iancu (IP Update, Vol. 21, No. 5), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit remanded an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more
In 2012, Congress created a new procedure that allows the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to conduct a litigation-like procedure to review and potentially cancel patents. This procedure - inter partes review (“IPR”) - has...more
The U.S. Supreme Court on April 24 issued its decision in the closely watched patent case Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, 138 S. Ct. 1365 (2018). The case addressed a constitutional challenge to...more
On April 24, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 7-2 decision, held that inter partes review (IPR) proceedings conducted by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) do not violate Article III or implicate the Seventh Amendment. ...more
The PTAB’s new guidance in light of a recent Supreme Court ruling changes the dynamics for patent owners and petitioners. Key Points: ..Partial institutions are no longer permitted. The PTAB will review all petitioned...more
As the most-active firm practicing at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), we are proud to have shared in our clients’ successes over the years. Fish was one of the first firms to file a post-grant petition in 2012, and...more
On April 24th, the Supreme Court decided two important cases related to the United States Patent & Trademark Office’s inter partes review (IPR) proceedings for reconsidering the prior grant of a patent – Oil States Energy...more
In a pair of decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the inter partes review (IPR) process created by the America Invents Act but required the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) to make a...more
Tuesday, April 24, 2018, proved to be a banner day for inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings. The United States Supreme Court issued two separate opinions addressing the regime, the first upholding the constitutionality of...more
The Supreme Court recently handed down two highly anticipated decisions concerning inter partes review (IPR) challenge proceedings in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s...more
• The Supreme Court in Oil States v. Greene’s Energy ruled 7-2 that cancellation of patent claims in an inter partes review does not violate either Article III or the Seventh Amendment of the Constitution. • In SAS...more
In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, the Supreme Court rejected constitutional challenges to the America Invents Act’s inter partes review process. The court held that inter partes review (IPR)...more