News & Analysis as of

Reversal Litigation Fees & Costs

White and Williams LLP

Delaware Supreme Court Applies Plain Meaning of Insurance Policy Language to Reverse $48 Million Defense Cost Award

White and Williams LLP on

An unbroken sequence of Delaware trial court decisions have reflected strong pro-policyholder leaning in insurance cases in furtherance of the state’s pro-business model. Following the most recent of these pro-policyholder...more

Perkins Coie

Award of Attorney’s Fees Warranted Where Plaintiff Lost on Most Claims But Achieved Primary Litigation Objective

Perkins Coie on

A plaintiff challenging a city council’s interpretation of a local ballot measure was entitled to recover costs and attorney fees when successful on only one cause of action because the primary relief sought was granted....more

Weintraub Tobin

Losing Twice at Trial: Denying Requests for Admission Can Come Back to Bite You

Weintraub Tobin on

Litigation tends to be expensive, increasingly so due to the burdens of discovery. (You can thank the advent of emails, text messages, and other forms of communication now documenting conversations that used to take place by...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Third Circuit Tackles Third-Party Funding Issues in In Re: National Football League Players’ Concussion Injury Litigation

Third-party litigation funding has received increased scrutiny over the past several years, particularly in the context of mass torts, class actions, and multidistrict litigation. Most of this scrutiny has focused on...more

McDermott Will & Emery

“Full Costs” Under Copyright Act Means Those Specified in General Costs Statute

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Kavanaugh, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the term “full costs” in 17 USC § 505 of the Copyright Act has no special, expansive meaning, but is limited to the costs...more

Sunstein LLP

March 2019 IP Update - Not All Litigation Expenses Are Recoverable Under the Copyright Act

Sunstein LLP on

On March 4, the Supreme Court overturned a ruling that required Rimini Street to pay $12.8 million for Oracle’s litigation costs in a copyright infringement case. Rimini Street, Inc. v. Oracle USA, Inc. Many of the costs...more

Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass

Supreme Court Issues Two Copyright Rulings

The U.S. Supreme Court issued two rulings last week on copyright law. In both cases, they acted to resolve conflicts between the Circuits, following closely to statutory language....more

Jones Day

Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"

Jones Day on

In Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corporation v. Wall-Street.com, the U.S. Supreme Court tackled questions relating to copyright applications vs. copyright registrations, while in Rimini Street v. Oracle, the justices ruled on...more

Jones Day

No Longer Paid in Full: "Full Costs" Covers Only Taxable Costs in Copyright Cases

Jones Day on

A unanimous ruling by the Supreme Court held that the word "full" was insufficient to justify awarding additional, nontaxable costs to the prevailing party. Under the American Rule, the prevailing party ordinarily must bear...more

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC

Supreme Court Issues Two Unanimous Decisions in Copyright Litigation Cases

On March 4, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two unanimous opinions interpreting provisions of the Copyright Act. In the first case, the Court decided that the Copyright Office must register a copyright before a copyright...more

McDermott Will & Emery

“Full Costs” under the Copyright Act Means Those Costs Specified in General Costs Statute

On March 4, 2019, the US Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision authored by Justice Kavanaugh in Rimini Street, Inc. v. Oracle USA, Inc., finding that the term “full costs” in 17 USC § 505 of the Copyright Act has no...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Supreme Court Allows Copyright Actions Only After Office Acts on Application and Limits Recovery of Costs

Ballard Spahr LLP on

In two unanimous opinions, the Supreme Court on March 4, 2019, clarified two important issues under the Copyright Act—in both cases, based on a strict reading of the relevant text. ...more

Snell & Wilmer

Recording “Un-Neighborly” Documents

Snell & Wilmer on

In September 2018, in Baumgartner v. Timmins, 245 Ariz. 334, 429 P.3d 567, the Arizona Court of Appeals provided further clarification on what constitutes an “encumbrance” on a property for purposes of Arizona’s statutory...more

Snell & Wilmer

SCOTUS: “Full Costs” Are Just Costs

Snell & Wilmer on

Today, March 4, 2019 the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Rimini Street v. Oracle USA that “full costs” described in 17 U.S.C. § 505 of the (Copyright Act) are limited to the six categories of taxable costs set...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

US Supreme Court Issues Two Unanimous Rulings Clarifying Meanings of ‘Registration’ and ‘Full Costs’ in Copyright Act

On March 4, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two unanimous decisions interpreting the Copyright Act. In Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com LLC, 586 U.S. ___, the Court resolved a circuit split over when...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Rimini Street, Inc. v. Oracle USA, Inc.

On March 4, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Rimini Street, Inc. v. Oracle USA, Inc., No. 17-1625, holding that a court’s discretion under section 505 of the Copyright Act to award “full costs” to the...more

Ladas & Parry LLP

SCOTUS Holds Large Copyright Costs Award In Rimini Street v. Oracle Is Not Permissible

Ladas & Parry LLP on

Yesterday, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court in Rimini Street, Inc. et al v. Oracle USA, Inc. et al to award damages for costs in the amount of $12.8 million in a...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Culbertson v. Berryhill

On January 8, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Culbertson v. Berryhill, No. 17-773, holding that the Social Security Act permits an attorney fee award greater than 25 percent of the claimant’s past-due...more

Knobbe Martens

Gust, Inc. v. Alphacap Ventures LLC

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Wallach, Linn and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Summary: In determining whether to award sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927,...more

Jaburg Wilk

The Ninth Circuit Helps Copyright Owners Battle Widespread Infringement in Glacier Films v. Turchin

Jaburg Wilk on

On July 24, 2018, the Ninth Circuit issued a decision that can be an important tool to help copyright owners enforce their rights. It’s not unusual for copyright owners to believe that it’s just not worth going after some...more

Knobbe Martens

Nantkwest v. Iancu

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - En Banc (excl. Chen), Opinion for the court filed by Stoll, joined by Newman, Lourie, Moore, O’Malley, Wallach, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Federal Circuit Denies PTO Attorneys’ Fees

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

Proskauer - California Employment Law

California Employment Law Notes - September 2017

Jobseeker Website May Be Compelled To Disclose Identity Of Anonymous Posters Who Criticized Employer - ZL Technologies, Inc. v. Does 1-7, 13 Cal. App. 5th 603 (2017) - ZL Technologies brought suit, alleging libel per se and...more

Proskauer - Minding Your Business

A District Court’s Discretion to Sanction Is Broad, “But For” a Causal Limitation

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified in Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger that even a district court’s exercise of broad discretion to impose a civil sanction for a litigant’s bad faith conduct has to be limited by a...more

Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP

United States Supreme Court Limits Sanctions Against Tire Manufacturer in Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger (April 18, 2017)

In Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger, plaintiffs asserted a products liability claim against Goodyear for a tire failure. The parties entered into a settlement agreement, after which plaintiffs discovered that Goodyear did...more

28 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide