Proof in Trial: University of Louisville
2021 Bid Protest Decisions with Far-Reaching Impacts for Government Contractors
#WorkforceWednesday: CA Whistleblower Retaliation Cases, NYC Pay Transparency Law, Biden’s Labor Agenda - Employment Law This Week®
Secondary Considerations of Non-Obviousness - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
The Risk of Personal Injury Claims from COVID-19 and What to Do About It
Navigating the New Normal: Risk Management and Legal Considerations for Real Estate Companies
VIDEO: Will Pending Federal Covid-19 Legislation Preempt Longstanding State Laws Regarding the Burden of Proof in Workers’ Compensation Claims?
Podcast: IP Life Sciences Landscape: Aiding Orange and Purple Book Patent Owners in Developing PTAB Survival Skills
II-31- The Changing 9 to 5 From 1980 to Today
A January 15, 2025, U.S. Supreme Court opinion brought welcome news for employers defending claims of worker exempt status misclassification under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). In the case at issue, E.M.D. Sales, Inc....more
In a unanimous opinion decided January 15, 2025, E.M.D. Sales, Inc., v. Carrerra et al., the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the less stringent preponderance of evidence standard, instead of the clear and convincing evidence...more
Employers are breathing a sigh of relief after the U.S. Supreme Court last week unanimously confirmed the application of a “preponderance of the evidence” standard to an employer’s burden of proof when it seeks to establish...more
Determining whether an employee is exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) has rarely been simple. A new decision from the U.S. Supreme Court provides much-needed clarity for employers....more
On January 15, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a rare unanimous decision in EMD Sales Inc. v. Carrera, addressing the standard of proof employers must meet to establish that an employee is exempt from the minimum wage and...more
Last week, in a highly anticipated ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in EMD Sales Inc. v. Carrera, Case No. 23-217, concluding that a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard applies when an employer seeks to...more
On Election Day, November 5, the United States Supreme Court will be hearing argument in E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera, an important case that addresses the evidentiary standard an employer must satisfy to establish whether...more
What evidence does an employer need to show a court to prove it correctly classified employees as exempt from minimum wage and overtime pay? The Supreme Court announced on June 17 that it will address a disagreement among...more
On June 17, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States decided to hear a wage and hour case concerning whether employers must meet a higher burden of proof to demonstrate that workers are exempt from the minimum wage and...more
Effective December 1, 2023, the amendment to the United States Federal Rule of Evidence 702 clarifies and emphasizes existing requirements for the admissibility of expert witness testimony. Overall, the amendment to Rule 702...more
It is always the employer’s burden of proof to prove an exemption under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), but there is controversy over what that evidentiary standard should be. In a recent case, a federal appellate court...more
The California Supreme Court just made things a bit more difficult for employers by lowering the bar and making it easier for disgruntled employees and ex-employees to bring state whistleblower claims against businesses. The...more
Many California medical staffs may be looking to start 2022 with updated bylaws. A recent case, Bichai v. Davita, Inc. (2021) 72 Cal.App.5th 1126, stands as a reminder that the bylaws cannot set forth a stricter burden of...more
In Hytera Communications Corp. Ltd. v. Motorola Solutions, Inc., 1-17-cv-01794 (NDOH 2021-04-29, Order) (Donald C. Nugent), the District Court denied defendant’s motion for attorney fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285, determining...more
The law is retroactive to March 9, 2020 and grants a presumption in the burden of proof to essential employees when claiming that contraction of the COVID-19 virus occurred at work. The COVID-19 law may lead to some confusion...more
The PTAB’s evolving evidentiary standards often perplex petitioners and patent owners. Historically, significant party effort has gone into attempting to establish that non-patent literature, such as articles, textbooks,...more
On remand from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted patent owner’s motion to amend on the basis that the totality of the record did not demonstrate by a preponderance of the...more
In a 2-1 decision issued on August 2, 2019, the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) in Electrolux Home Products, Inc., 368 NLRB No. 34 (2019) reversed an Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) decision, and held that...more
Unanimous decisions from the Federal Mine Safety and Health Commission are rare, but on July 11, 2019, the Commission ruled 5-0 to reverse an Administrative Law Judge’s finding of a fall protection violation in Sims Crane...more
Recently, Delaware corporations faced with demands for books and records under 8 Del. C. § 220 have increasingly been forced to contend with demands for electronic communications, such as emails. Historically, the Delaware...more
Recently in Nobel Biocare Services AG v. Instradent USA, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) in an inter partes review (“IPR”)...more
In 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed more appeals from the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) than any other venue—a first in its over 30-year history. The post grant proceedings created by the...more
In connection with a dispute over parking meters, the PTAB, on March 27, 2017, issued a decision in IPR2016-00067 that Duncan Parking Technologies, Inc. (DPT) had not met its burden of showing, by a preponderance of evidence,...more
The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s final written decisions holding that claims directed to Novartis’s dementia drug compositions containing Exelon were obvious in Novartis AG v. Noven Pharm. Inc., No. 2016-1679 (Fed....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Third Circuit held that, in a failure-to-promote USERRA case, plaintiffs need not plead or prove that they are objectively qualified for the position sought in order to meet their initial burden of...more