Notorious: The RBG Podcast - Episode 11: Three Cheers for Beer: A Discussion of Craig v. Boren
The M&A Word of the Day® from the Book of Jargon® – Global Mergers & Acquisitions Is Revlon Doctrine
Konczal: Dodd-Frank Reforms Get Roughed Up in Court
On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court overruled Chevron in Loper-Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, fundamentally altering the judicial approach to agency interpretations of the law, particularly when assessing an agency’s scope...more
On April 30, 2024, the Associated Press (AP) reported the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) will propose a rule to reschedule cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). More...more
On August 29, 2023, the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) sent the Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) its recommendation to move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act...more
A California Court of Appeal held that special legislation providing fast-track judicial review to the Howard Terminal Project did not impose a deadline for the Governor to certify the project for streamlined environmental...more
M&A in the media industry is about to pick up. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the U.S. Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) 2017 rollback of media ownership limits. Media companies that once avoided specific...more
In 2020, Rx IP Update reported on a number of developments in Canadian life sciences IP and regulatory law. We review top developments below: Table of Contents 1. COVID-19: CIPO, Federal Courts, Health Canada 2. PMPRB:...more
On July 24, 2020, Justice McHaffie of the Federal Court dismissed Natco’s application for judicial review, finding that Health Canada’s refusal to accept Natco’s Abbreviated New Drug Submission (ANDS) for its tenofovir...more
The Background: A shareholder challenged an extraordinary and extremely lucrative incentive-based compensation package awarded by Tesla to its chair, CEO, and controlling shareholder, claiming a breach of fiduciary duties. ...more
On October 7, 2019, California became the first state to enact legislation—Assembly Bill 824 ("AB 824")—rendering certain pharmaceutical patent litigation settlement agreements presumptively anticompetitive. This alert...more
In its long-awaited ruling addressing whether the Administrative Orders Review Act (Hobbs Act) requires district courts to accept the FCC's legal interpretations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (the TCPA), the...more
Recently, the Federal Circuit held that an ex-employee (of Cisco) who founded a competitor (Arista) can challenge their own assigned patent, finding that, after assignment, they are not the patent owner. The Court held that...more
Section 301 provides the president with broad authority to implement new policies and procedures that could impact reviews of Chinese investment in the United States. The president could rely on the International Emergency...more
On March 6, the Missouri Supreme Court declined to review the intermediate appellate court’s decision in Fox v. Johnson & Johnson, which vacated a $72 million talc verdict awarded in St. Louis City Court. ...more
Eleven days after the Federal Circuit’s en banc opinion in Wi-Fi Onc, LLC v. Broadcom Corp., Nos. 15-1944, -1945 & -1946 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 8, 2018), a three-judge panel granted a petition by patent owner Click-to-Call...more
On October 20, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued yet another opinion finding that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decisions related to the institution of an inter partes review (IPR) are not subject to judicial review. ...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In the remand of the high profile Mach Mining litigation that was before the Supreme Court in 2015, a district court denied the EEOC’s motion for reconsideration of a discovery order pertaining to the scope...more
In an order recently issued in EEOC v Jetstream Ground Services, Inc., Case No. 13-CV-02340 (D. Colo. Sept. 29, 2015), Judge Christine Arguello of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado ruled that the EEOC had...more
As the number and complexity of cross-border and multi-jurisdictional disputes increase, companies can use 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to obtain evidence from U.S.-based entities for use in those foreign proceedings. Specifically, §...more
The California Supreme Court heard argument on September 2, 2015 in a greenhouse gas (GHG) and fully protected species case with important state-wide implications. (Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish and...more
Trademark owners and practitioners who took heart in the Supreme Court's seemingly confined holding that issue preclusion can but does not necessarily apply to likelihood of confusion determinations by the Trademark Trial and...more
Latham & Watkins partner Michele Johnson explains the M&A term Go Shop, a term used to describe both a standard of judicial review and a required determination by the Board of Directors of the target company. For additional...more