A Judicial Perspective on Using Technology at Oral Argument | Judge John Owens | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
On November 22, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court granted two petitions for certiorari to review the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s (Fifth Circuit) en banc decision in Consumers’ Research v. Federal Communications...more
In a decision that will impact pay practices in the oil and gas and many other industries in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and beyond, the en banc U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed on Sept. 9, 2021, that...more
Last fall, the Federal Circuit decided in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. that Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) serving on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) were principal officers and thus had been improperly...more
On October 4, the Eleventh Circuit agreed to review en banc a panel decision holding that a consumer’s heightened risk of identity theft is enough to establish Article III standing. Named plaintiff David Muransky filed a...more
On Monday, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in Iancu v. NantKwest to resolve a circuit split concerning “expenses” a patent applicant must pay when challenging the United States Patent and Trademark...more
This decision should be a welcome development for patent applicants seeking review. On July 27, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its en banc opinion in NantKwest, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 16-1794...more
On July 27, 2018, the Federal Circuit ruled that a patent applicant’s obligation to pay the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) “expenses” for district court proceedings to review patent application rejections does not...more
On February 26, 2018, the Federal appellate court covering New York State ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from discrimination based on their sexual orientation. The case is Zarda v....more
In an en banc decision in Zarda v. Altitude Express, Inc., the Second Circuit has become the latest federal appeals court to hold that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is prohibited sex discrimination under...more
Defendant-appellee Etihad Airways recently petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc of Doe v. Etihad Airways, P.J.S.C., a decision by a panel of that court that...more
On July 6, the full Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals declined to hear the appeal of a case dismissing a sexual orientation bias claim under Title VII for lack of jurisdiction. This decision creates a split among the federal...more
The Second Circuit has denied a plaintiff’s request to rehear argument en banc (that is, before all of the court’s judges) in a case alleging that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on...more
As we reported a few months ago in a previous article, “7th Circuit Rehears Hively Case”, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to rehear the case of Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College, on the issue of whether Title...more
We previously discussed the conflict between a Second Circuit panel’s holding in April that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act did not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and the Seventh Circuit’s...more
As we observed in a recent post on the Seventh Circuit’s decision in Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College extending Title VII to sexual orientation claims, the Supreme Court will probably have to resolve the disagreement...more
On April 4, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (covering Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin), sitting en banc, handed down what is being called a monumental decision in the development of legal...more
Federal law protects applicants and employees from negative treatment in connection with their employment, where that negative treatment is based on a protected characteristic. Traditionally, courts have interpreted the...more
Last summer, we wrote about a unique situation that arose in the case of Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, No. 14-1935 (7th Cir. July 19, 2016), in which the Seventh Circuit found itself unable to assemble a “majority” of...more