News & Analysis as of

Separation of Powers Supreme Court of the United States Appeals

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

DC Circuit Rules White House CEQ Lacks Authority to Issue Binding NEPA Regulations

The White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) lacks statutory authority to issue binding regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). While the decision does not invalidate any actions...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Invalidates Small-Dollar Rule, Throws the Future of the CFPB Into Question

On October 19, 2022, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Community Financial Services Association of America, et al. v. CFPB (CFSA v. CFPB) invalidating the CFPB’s Payday, Vehicle-Title, and Certain...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

Commissioner of Patents Had Authority to Review IPRs While Moonlighting as USPTO Director

On May 27, in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., the Federal Circuit agreed that the Commissioner for Patents, performing the duties of the Director of the USPTO, had the authority to decide a request for rehearing of a...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson - Consumer Financial...

Consumer Law Hinsights – July 2020

Welcome to Consumer Law Hinsights?a monthly compilation of nationwide consumer protection cases of interest to financial services and accounts receivable management companies. This edition highlights our interactive COVID-19...more

Latham & Watkins LLP

US Supreme Court Decisions in Presidential Subpoena Cases: Implications for Private Parties

Latham & Watkins LLP on

The Court’s recent rulings on state grand jury and congressional subpoenas identify important limitations on the purpose and scope of these investigative tools. Key Points: ..In July 2020, the Court held that the...more

Saul Ewing LLP

Supreme Court Affirms Congressional Subpoena Power but Remands for Further Review

Saul Ewing LLP on

In yesterday’s decision in Trump v. Mazars, USA, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that Congress has the power to conduct investigations in support of its power to consider and enact legislation. However, it relied on historical...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court - July 9, 2020

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued the following decisions: Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, No. 19-715; Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG, No. 19-760: In April 2019, three United States House of Representatives’ committees...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP

On July 9, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, No. 19-715, holding that in assessing whether a congressional subpoena directed at personal information of the president is “related to, and in...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Hernandez et al. v. Mesa

On February 25, 2020, the Supreme Court decided Hernandez et al. v. Mesa, No. 17-1678, declining to extend a judicially created damages remedy for a constitutional violation by a federal employee, a U.S. Border Patrol agent...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Skadden's 2020 Insights

Despite political and economic uncertainties, markets and deal activity were resilient in 2019, and strong fundamentals remain in place heading into 2020. Companies continue to face a challenging litigation and enforcement...more

Hogan Lovells

Supreme Court says Congress can stop lawsuit that threatens Tribes casino

Hogan Lovells on

The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision last Tuesday affirmed the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Patchak v. Zinke, holding that Congress through the Gun Lake Act, which reaffirms...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Patchak v. Zinke

On February 27, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Patchak v. Zinke, No. 16-498. No opinion commanded a majority of the Court, but six justices concluded that the plaintiff’s lawsuit under the Indian...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Supreme Court to Decide the Constitutionality of Inter Partes Review

In a move that could drastically change the patent law landscape, the United States Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Oil States Energy Services LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group LLC, No. 16-712, to answer the question...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

SCA Hygiene Case Provides a Clear Win for Patent Owners

In SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products, LLC, the Supreme Court last week overruled the Federal Circuit’s en banc decision that laches (unreasonable delay in bringing a claim) can bar recovery of...more

Jones Day

Supreme Court Curbs Laches as a Defense in Patent Cases

Jones Day on

In SCA Hygiene Products v. First Quality Baby Products, decided on March 21, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court significantly reduced the role of the laches defense in patent actions: "Laches cannot be interposed as a defense...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Supreme Court Eliminates the Laches Defense in Patent Cases

The Supreme Court held that laches is no longer a defense against patent infringement. The Patent Act’s six-year statute of limitations already limits the window for damages for infringement, which precludes any further...more

16 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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