The JustPod: A murder-for-hire allegation, public corruption trial, and notable acquittal
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 309: Listen and Learn -- Felony Murder and Causation (Criminal Law)
Key Discovery Points: If You Dispose of Relevant Hard Drives You Will Face (Some) Consequences
Key Discovery Point: Collecting Hyperlinked File Versions – Contemporaneous or “As Sent”?
Podcast - The 3 Core Themes of Trial Law: Do the Right Thing
Aligning Business Goals with Legal Strategies Amid Regulatory Change – Speaking of Litigation Video Podcast
House Final Settlement Hearing: Key Insights and Future Implications for NIL — Highway to NIL Podcast
The 3 Core Themes of Trial Law: Tell Your Story
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
eDiscovery Case Law Podcast: How Failing to Meet and Confer Effectively Can Lead to Sanctions
The JustPod: Lawyer, Gentleman, and Counsel to the Stars: A Discussion with Brian McMonagle
The Subpoena Playbook
Podcast - The 3 Core Themes of Trial Law: Know Your Court
Podcast - Real Justice for Real People
The Briefing: Diana Copeland – “Surviving R. Kelly” But Not Netflix’s Motion to Dismiss
(Podcast) The Briefing: Diana Copeland – “Surviving R. Kelly” But Not Netflix’s Motion to Dismiss
Key Discovery Points: Timing is Mostly Everything in eDiscovery
The JustPod: The King of Cross: A Discussion with Larry Pozner, a Leading Expert on Cross-Examination
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 305: Spotlight on Civil Procedure (Part 2 – Discovery)
There Is No Right Path
Key Takeaway: The USPTO has reinstated earlier discretionary denial standards (including Fintiv) and introduced a new two-phase review process, which is expected to lead to more frequent denials of IPR petitions. Both patent...more
Two recent memoranda from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) have sought to clarify the factors by which boards will evaluate discretionary denial under Fintiv. This guidance follows the U.S. Patent and...more
Discovery procedures in inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings, governed by 37 CFR § 42.51, are more limited in scope and timing compared to cases in district court. There are three types of discovery at the Patent Trial...more
The authors have recently proposed alternative analyses for the discretionary denial of IPR and PGR petitions involved in parallel district court litigation, as well as for the discretionary denial of serial petitions filed...more
In 2012, Congress enacted the American Invents Act (“AIA”) for the purpose of “establish[ing] a more efficient and streamlined patent system that will improve patent quality and limit unnecessary and counterproductive...more
Last week, the Court did not have many precedential decisions as Washington, D.C., COVID-19 or not, was in its usual August slowdown. Unlike the previous two weeks where we touched upon non-patent issues, we return (kind of,...more
Covered Business Method (“CBM”) review ends in mid-September, and you have one last chance to take advantage. In 2011, the AIA introduced three new administrative review proceedings of patentability with the goal of...more
Long before the AIA, declarations were a tool that was available during patent prosecution to put evidence, e.g., post-filing data and expert opinions, in front of an Examiner to rebut obviousness or lack of enablement...more
The America Invents Act (“AIA”), signed into law in 2011, introduced inter partes review (“IPR”), which allows parties to challenge the validity of patent claims in proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more
Defendants sued for patent infringement in district court commonly seek litigation stays based on an American Invents Act (AIA)-contested proceeding that assesses the validity of the patents-in-suit before the Patent Trial...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
When faced with allegations of patent infringement at the International Trade Commission (ITC), a respondent must quickly evaluate whether or not to request an AIA review (hereinafter, inter partes review for convenience) at...more
Measure twice cut once – the same can be said of the Petition in American Invents Act (“AIA”) proceedings. Time and again the Board and Federal Circuit[i] have used the Administrative Procedure Act[ii] (“APA”) – guaranteeing...more
Depositions are an important, yet sometimes overlooked, part of AIA proceedings, such as inter partes review (“IPR”) trial proceedings. It is important to understand that IPR depositions differ in significant ways – both in...more
The AIA prohibits institution of a post-grant proceeding when the petitioner previously “filed a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of the patent.” 35 U.S.C. § 315(a)(1). PGR petitions (including CBM petitions)...more
There is no doubt that “the potential for estoppel is one of the important considerations for defendants in deciding whether or not to file an [inter partes review (“IPR”)] petition.” Shaw Indus. Grp., Inc. v. Automated Creel...more
When a patent is challenged in an inter partes review and a final written decision has been issued, a statutory estoppel will prevent certain subsequent proceedings. The scope of the estoppel, which applies to both Patent and...more
The America Invents Act (AIA) has been in effect from more than a year and half. Now, many have begun to ask if the patent office trials the AIA created are living up to their promise of lowering patent litigation costs and...more