Corruption, Crime and Compliance - “The New FCPA”: Sanctions and Export Control Enforcement and Compliance
Giving Compliance Advice
Corruption, Crime, & Compliance - Five Steps to Enhance Your Sanctions Compliance Program
Corruption, Crime and Compliance - Deep Dive Into Wells Fargo’s $30 Million OFAC Settlement
FINCast Ep. 36 – Regulators’ Roundtable to Forecast 2023
Guidepost in Motion EP25: State of Compliance with Alixandra Smith Part 2
FCPA Compliance Report - Matt Silverman on Potential Sanctions Against Russia
Argentina: A Look at the Case of Lázaro Báez - Laundering the Proceeds of Corruption and Tax Fraud
Nota Bene Podcast Episode 131: U.S. Sanctions Against Russia: Valid or Ineffective Economic Policy? with Fatema Merchant and Mario Torrico
Compliance into the Weeds - SAP Trade Sanctions Enforcement Action
What to Expect from the Biden Administration
A Look Ahead at the Biden Administration’s Regulatory and Enforcement Priorities
Compliance Perspectives: The German Corporate Sanctions Act
Episode 153 -- The Mighty Amazon Falls to OFAC Enforcement Sword
Navigating an Increasingly Complex Sanctions Landscape: New Exposures for Corporations and Shipping
Episode 120: Interview of NAVEX Global Third-Party Risk Officials: Chris Bailey and Stephen Gooding
U.S. policy reversal allows suits in U.S. courts and visa denials, for “trafficking” in confiscated property in Cuba
Jones Day Presents: Considerations in Implementing Blockchain Technology
This Week in FCPA-Episode 80, The Last Jedi Edition
The Perils of Compliance with the Russia Sanctions Program
The Director of the USPTO initiated sua sponte review of a PTAB panel’s decision to impose sanctions based on patentee’s conduct during IPR proceedings.The PTAB cancelled all of patentee’s claims, including those not...more
Director Vidal recently issued sanctions against OpenSky Industries (“OpenSky”) for attempted extortion during settlement negotiations and abuse of the IPR process for US Patent 7,725,759 and awarded $413,264.15 to VLSI...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a sua sponte order regarding the impermissibility of incorporating by reference arguments from one brief into another, especially when doing so causes the brief to exceed...more
In Ventex Co., Ltd. v. Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc., IPR2017-00651 (PTAB Apr. 12, 2023) (per curiam), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) found that petitioner Ventex Co., Ltd.’s (“Ventex) failure to...more
Last month, in OpenSky Industries v. VLSI Technology LLC, IPR2021-01064 (Oct. 4, 2022), the Director of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a precedential decision regarding abuse of process. The decision...more
The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) Director issued a precedential opinion finding that filing an inter partes review (IPR) solely to extract payment in a settlement—without the intent to prosecute the IPR to completion—is...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld an attorneys’ fees award after the patent owner brought successive patent infringement suits attempting “to refile to wipe the slate clean” after the first court was...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) decision holding that the term “self-similar” was not indefinite and denying leave to file a sanctions motion. ClearOne, Inc. v....more
ATLANTA GAS LIGHT COMPANY v. BENNETT REGULATOR GUARDS, INC. Before Newman, Lourie, and Stoll - Summary: Termination decision made by the Board in part based on the time-bar was “intimately related” to the institution...more
Although infrequently awarded, district courts are empowered to issue sanctions for behavior at the PTAB that they deem “exceptional” under Octane Fitness. In Game and Technology Co., Ltd. v. Wargaming Group Limited,...more
Finding that several of the patent owner’s communications were improper ex parte communications, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) entered an order granting in part the petitioner’s motion for sanctions. Apple Inc. v....more
Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.5(d), communications with a Board member regarding a specific proceeding are not permitted “unless both parties have an opportunity to be involved in the communication.” This prohibition, however, does...more
IPR Petitioner’s Initial Identification of the Real Parties in Interest Is to Be Accepted Unless and Until Disputed by a Patent Owner - In Worlds Inc. v. Bungie, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-1481, -1546, -1583, the Federal...more
Following up on our article on depositions the Board recently denied a motion for sanctions by the Patent Owner, which alleged that the Petitioner’s questioning during deposition exceeded the scope of the witness’s...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
Arbitration - Waymo v. Uber Technologies, 870 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2017) - Waymo sued Uber and others for trade secret misappropriation and patent infringement. Uber contends that Waymo should be compelled to...more
District Court Abused Discretion in Ignoring Federal Circuit Mandate to Reconsider Attorneys’ Fees Under Octane Fitness - In Adjustacam, LLC v. Newegg, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-1882, the Federal Circuit held that a district...more
Our report includes discussions of six of the precedential cases decided in the past week and will include the other three cases in next week’s report. In Aylus v. Apple, the panel finds prosecution disclaimer in a...more
Commission Suspends ‘939 Investigation Enforcement Pending PTAB Result - On July 21, 2016, the International Trade Commission (“the Commission”) issued a notice that it had found a violation of Section 337 in Certain Cinema...more
The United States Patent and Trademark Office recently amended 37 C.F.R. § 42.11 to include a certification requirement similar to that of Rule 11. Section 42.11 prescribes the duty of candor owed to the Patent Office. As...more
Yesterday the PTAB issued institution decisions in five Bass IPR petitions—denying institution of IPR2015-01086 against Biogen and instituting four IPR petitions against Celgene (IRP2015-01092, 01096, 01102, and 01103)....more
Many pharmaceutical companies have complained about the IPR petitions filed by Kyle Bass and the Coalition for Affordable Drugs against Orange Book-listed patents covering approved pharmaceutical products, but Celgene Corp....more
On Friday September 25, the PTAB issued its decision on Celgene’s sanctions motions seeking dismissal of five IPRs filed by Kyle Bass and his hedge fund Coalition for Affordable Drugs VI. In June, Celgene filed sanctions...more
In a recent order, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) indicated that it will consider a motion for sanctions based on a claim of “abuse of process” in Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings filed by the Coalition for...more
Federal Circuit Upholds Award of Sanctions for a “Frivolous” Patent Lawsuit - On June 5, 2014, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Southern District of New York’s decision to sanction Appellant and its attorneys for...more