JONES DAY TALKS®: Women in IP: 2020 in Review and a Look Toward 2021
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
Bill on Bankruptcy: Lawyers Easily Make Simple Words Complicated
Bill on Bankruptcy: ResCap Report, a Bargain at $83 Million
As Expected, Noel Canning v. NLRB Headed to the Supreme Court
Bill on Bankruptcy: How Purchasers of AMR Stock Made a Killing
In a long-awaited opinion — Siry Investment, L.P. v. Farkhondehpour — the California Supreme Court held that California Penal Code section 496 can apply to a business dispute. The opinion resolves a split of authority among...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently granted certiorari to tackle a technical copyright registration question: when a defendant alleges knowing inaccuracies in a copyright registration, does 17 U.S.C. § 411 require referral to the...more
This week, the Ninth Circuit creates a potential circuit split on personal jurisdiction in in rem proceedings, and clarifies whether a post-judgment motion for attorneys’ fees extends the time to appeal (spoiler alert: it...more
Can the sledgehammer remedies of California Penal Code section 496 — treble (triple) damages and attorney fees — apply for misappropriation of an LLC’s property? The California Supreme Court is set to answer that question...more
As followers of this blog may recall, in December 2019, the Supreme Court resolved a circuit split as to whether the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) may recover its “attorneys’ fees” (effectively, the pro...more
Almost one year ago, in Switzer v. Wood, California’s Fifth Appellate District held that an LLC manager or member participating in the theft of the LLC’s property could face liability under Penal Code section 496 — a statute...more
A buyer and seller of real estate will often include a liquidated damages provision in the purchase and sale agreement as a means for stipulating the amount of damages the seller will receive in the event of a breach of the...more
The Supreme Court handed down a unanimous copyright decision in March 2019 with implications for anyone involved in a copyright dispute, as well as for marketers and brands that create and use copyrighted materials. In Fourth...more
On Monday, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in Iancu v. NantKwest to resolve a circuit split concerning “expenses” a patent applicant must pay when challenging the United States Patent and Trademark...more
As we wrote previously, the Federal Circuit sitting en banc held that a patent applicant can seek district court review of a PTO rejection of its application without having to pay for the time the PTO’s attorneys spent on the...more
This decision should be a welcome development for patent applicants seeking review. On July 27, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its en banc opinion in NantKwest, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 16-1794...more
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
On May 14, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in United Riggers & Erectors, Inc. v. Coast Iron & Steel Co., No. S231549, slip. op. (Cal. Sup. Ct. May 14, 2018). In it, the Court narrowly construed the “good...more
The Supreme Court will soon hear oral arguments on standards for awarding attorneys’ fees to the winner of a copyright dispute. Currently there are at least three different test being applied by federal courts. Data analysis...more