Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 306: Spotlight on Civil Procedure (Part 3 – The Civil Lawsuit)
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
RICO's Person/Enterprise Distinction - RICO Report Podcast
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 286: Listen and Learn -- Conclusory Pleadings Under Rule 12(b)(6) (Civ Pro)
Navigating Civil Standing Requirements for Defense Success — RICO Report Podcast
Episode 322 -- Checking in on Caremark Cases
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 208: Listen and Learn -- Motions to Dismiss a Case
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - The Yonays Take the First Sortie in Copyright Fight With Paramount Over Top Gun Maverick
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: The Yonays Take the First Sortie in Copyright Fight With Paramount Over Top Gun Maverick
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Paramount is Ready to Dogfight in Top Gun Maverick Copyright Lawsuit
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Paramount is Ready to Dogfight in Top Gun Maverick Copyright Lawsuit
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Cookie Co’s Motion to Dismiss Trademark Lawsuit by Restaurant Crumbles
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Cookie Co’s Motion to Dismiss Trademark Lawsuit by Restaurant Crumbles
Second Circuit Decision Potentially Broadens RICO Proximate Cause Element - RICO Report Podcast
Anatomy of a Successful Motion to Dismiss in RICO Case
A Discussion on the Kollaritsch v. Michigan State University Board of Trustees Decision
I-16 – Kneeling, Indefinite Leave, DC Updates, Non-Compete Consideration, and Pretty as a Protected Class
Case Involving Burger King Employee Spitting in Officer’s Burger Goes Before WA Supreme Court
In a February 10, 2025 order, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the application of the collateral estoppel doctrine to patent claims asserted in a district court infringement action where other claims in the same...more
On March 11, 2025, District Judge Margaret M. Garnett dismissed SafeCast Limited’s (“SafeCast”) patent infringement lawsuit against Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”) because SafeCast failed to secure counsel. SafeCast Ltd....more
“Because Congress intended inter partes reviews to serve as a faster and more cost-effective alternative to litigating validity in district courts, discovery in inter partes reviews is limited.” See Garmin Int’l, Inc. v....more
After an inter partes review finds certain claims of a patent unpatentable, may the patentee assert other claims, immaterially different, in district court without being collaterally estopped? This was the question presented...more
On February 10, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc., where the Court held that a “a prior final written decision of the [PTAB] of unpatentability on separate...more
On September 17, 2024, Judges Taranto, Chen and Cunningham of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) upheld the invalidation of a patent belonging to Angel Technologies Group, LLC and dismissed...more
Phillip Morris can’t seem to catch its breath. As discussed in a previous post, just a few weeks ago the Federal Circuit upheld the ITC’s ban on the importation and sale of Phillip Morris’s line of heated tobacco and...more
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of...more
Judge Albright of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas granted, in part, Meta Platforms, Inc.’s (“Meta”) 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss (“Motion”) in Grecia Estate Holdings LLC v. Meta Platforms, Inc....more
The PTAB recently denied a motion to dismiss a Revised Petition and terminate an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding despite Petitioner’s alleged withdrawal of the Original Petition and failure to comply with the word limit...more
Biofrontera AG (“Petitioner”) filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the petition during the preliminary phase of the proceedings. Here, DUSA Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Patent Owner”) had not yet filed a Preliminary Response, and...more
On Nov. 10, 2021, the Northern District of California granted the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Apple and co-plaintiffs challenging the Patent Trial and Appeal...more
By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Stragent, LLC v. BMW of North America, LLC et al., Civil Action No. 20-510-LPS (D.Del. March 25, 2021) (consolidated), the Court denied Defendants’ motions to...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Apple, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2019-1922, -1923, -1925, -1926 (Fed. Cir. July 9, 2020) - This week’s case of the week focuses, not on a patent issue, but on a procedural issue common...more
One-year Clock for Filing IPR Petition Applies to Litigants and Parties that Become Privies of the Litigant Prior to Institution. In Power Integrations, Inc v. Semiconductor Components, Appeal No. 2018-1607, the Federal...more
In a non-precedential opinion, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s grant of preliminary injunction requiring a licensee to withdraw its inter partes review (IPR) and post grant review...more
Just Because Something May Result From a Prior Art Teaching Does Not Make it Inherent in that Teaching - In Personal Web Technologies, LLC v. Apple, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1599, the Federal Circuit clarified that the mere...more
ArcelorMittal Atlantique Et Lorraine v. AK Steel Corporation, Appeal No. 2017-1637 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 14, 2018) - In an opinion originally filed as sealed on Nov. 5 and unsealed on Nov. 18, the Federal Circuit vacated and...more
Addressing 35 USC § 315(b), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sat en banc to determine whether dismissal “without prejudice” would extinguish the effect of a previously served infringement complaint, an event...more
Below is an update on recent developments in several litigations involving biosimilar products. Amgen v. Sandoz (filgrastim, pegfilgrastim): As we previously reported, the district court granted summary judgment of...more
A Complaint Identifying Infringing Products and the Patents Allegedly Infringed, Accompanied by Statements that the Products Meet All Elements of at Least One Claim of the Asserted Patents, May be Sufficient to Meet the...more
On April 5, 2018, Judge Oetken (S.D.N.Y.) granted Plaintiff Rovi Guides Inc.’s (“Rovi”) motion to lift a stay related to U.S. Patent No. 8,122,034 (“the ’034 patent”), only one of five patents at issue in a case that was...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Ottah v. Fiat Chrysler, Appeal No. 2017-1842 (March 7, 2018) - In Ottah v. Fiat Chrysler, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment of non-infringement as to...more
On December 19, 2017, a seven-judge expanded PTAB panel ruled that the University of Minnesota (UM) waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity defense when it filed a patent infringement action in federal district court. ...more