Eighth Circuit Reverses Dismissal of Putative Class Claims
DE Under 3: Reversal of 2019 Enterprise Rent-a-Car Trial Decision; EEOC Commissioner Nominee Update; Overtime Listening Session
Revisiting McGirt: New Legal Developments Challenge Oklahoma’s Landmark Ruling
Court of Appeals Reversals from a Criminal Perspective | Jim Huggler | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
The Immediate and Lasting Impacts of McGirt: A Novel Ruling for Oklahoma
The Dangers of Untimely Filings – What Employers Need to Know
Nota Bene Episode 98: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Mark on U.S. Antitrust Law for 2020 with Thomas Dillickrath and Bevin Newman
#BigIdeas2020: NLRB’s Actions Impact Employers in 2020 - Employment Law This Week® - Trending News
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
Podcast: South Dakota v. Wayfair
E17: Carpenter Decision Builds Up Privacy from #SCOTUS
I-16 – Kneeling, Indefinite Leave, DC Updates, Non-Compete Consideration, and Pretty as a Protected Class
In a split decision, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court and ruled that President Trump is not obligated for now to reinstate fired National Labor Relations Board and Merit Systems Protection Board...more
On March 20, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia dismissed Sonda v. West Virginia Oil and Gas Conservation Commission for lack of standing. The lawsuit was brought by mineral interest owners...more
Mitek Systems, Inc. v. United Services Automobile Association, Appeal No. 2021-1989 (Fed. Cir. May 20, 2022) - Our Case of the Week this week is a declaratory judgment action brought against USAA. In a 27-page opinion,...more
A federal judge has held that Pennsylvania’s Rule 8.4(g),1 which subjects lawyers to professional discipline for engaging in discriminatory conduct, violates both the free speech clause of the First Amendment and the due...more
On March 22, 2022, the New York Court of Appeals held that the historical prohibition on “gambling” in Article I, §9 of the New York Constitution does not encompass skill-based competitions like daily fantasy sports (DFS)...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
On Dec.16, 2020, in Midway Venture LLC v. County of San Diego, the San Diego Superior Court preliminarily enjoined enforcement of two COVID-19-related California public health restrictions as applied to two adult...more
On June 1, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a unanimous decision in Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico v. Aurelius Investment, LLC, No. 18–1334, holding that the selection of the...more
On June 1, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico v. Aurelius Investment, LLC, holding that the Appointments Clause of the Constitution does not restrict the appointment...more
In Personal Audio, the Federal Circuit upheld a district court judgment dismissal of a jury verdict for patent owner throwing out a $1.3 million judgement because the patent was later invalidated at the PTAB. Patent owner...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
A series of decisions over the past year — on issues such as make-whole premiums, intercreditor agreements, backstops for rights offerings and nonconsensual third-party releases — will likely have a significant impact in 2020...more
The Appointments Clause: Ensuring That PTAB Decisions Are Subject to Constitutional Checks and Balances In Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 18-2251, the Federal Circuit ruled that, under the then-existing...more
On December 18, 2019, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) individual mandate is unconstitutional but remanded to the district court to assess whether the...more
The Pennsylvania Department of Revenue issued a bulletin announcing its view that the US Supreme Court’s sales and use tax decision in Wayfair v. South Dakota applies equally to corporate net income tax and authorizes the...more
On September 24, 2019, the Ohio Supreme Court announced the General Assembly has broad authority to regulate public-works contracts that subject Ohio’s workers to residency preferences or restrictions. In The City of...more
Until just last year, it was common for public sector collective bargaining agreements to require employees who elected not to belong to a union, but were still covered by the CBA, to pay “fair share” fees to the union as a...more
On Friday, August 9, 2019, in Brackeen v. Bernhardt, No. 18-11479, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit declared that the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) and its implementing federal regulations (“the Final Rule”)...more
In a 6–3 opinion, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed a 2017 US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision holding the ban on registration of immoral or scandalous trademarks under the Lanham Act to be an...more
Last week, on June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Lanham Act’s “immoral or scandalous” bar to trademark registration constitutes viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment, and thus...more
In permitting the registration of the “vulgar” term FUCT, the Supreme Court recently extended its 2016 ruling from Matal v. Tam, which allowed the registration of the trademark THE SLANTS for an Asian-American rock band...more
The road to permitting the registration of George Carlin's "seven dirty words" began in 2017, with the Supreme Court holding unconstitutional the Trademark Act's prohibition against registration of trademarks which are...more
On June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court, in Iancu v. Brunetti, reviewing the trademark application for “FUCT”, held that the Lanham’s Act’s provision, prohibiting the registration of “immoral[] or scandalous”...more
In our prior blog entries... we followed the course of Matal v. Tam, the case involving the mark “THE SLANTS.” In that case, the Supreme Court struck down a portion of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a), on...more
On Monday, the Supreme Court held that the ban on “immoral or scandalous” trademarks was unconstitutional under the First Amendment. The Court found that, as with the recently struck down ban on “disparaging” marks, the ban...more