Advertisement

July 14, 2014

Litigation, Trial, ADR, E-Discovery & Court News

Syndicate content

The National Law Review is a no log-in resource of legal articles addressing litigation, trial practice, appellate practice and alternative dispute resolution. Legal topics addressed include:

Details of actions by federal and state and local regulatory agencies as well as private actions from across the U.S. are added daily.

 

Title Organization Date Postedsort icon
The Washington Redskins Lose Again, and Not on the Field Greenberg Traurig, LLP 7/14/2014
Loral Space & Communications, Inc. v. Viasat, Inc.: Denying Rehearing and Expanded Panel Requests IPR2014-00236, 239, 240 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/13/2014
Supreme Court Holds Computer-Implemented Invention Patent-Ineligible: The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same Greenberg Traurig, LLP 7/13/2014
Prism Pharma Co., Ltd. v. Choongwae Pharma Corporation, Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review IPR2014-00315 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/13/2014
Supreme Court Allows Taxpayers to Question IRS Agents Regarding Propriety of Summons Greenberg Traurig, LLP 7/13/2014
ZTE Corp. and ZTE (USA) Inc. v. InterDigital Technology Corp.: Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review IPR2014-00275 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/12/2014
UARG v. EPA: Is the Tailoring Rule All Dead or Just Part Dead? Beveridge & Diamond PC 7/12/2014
New Supreme Court Ruling On EPA Authority Over Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) – Little Clarification on the 111(d) Regulations Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP 7/12/2014
Supreme Court Modifies Class Certification Procedure in Securities Fraud Class Actions Greenberg Traurig, LLP 7/12/2014
Hostile Work Environment Case Gets Additional Fourth Circuit Scrutiny Poyner Spruill LLP 7/12/2014
Google Inc. and Twitter, Inc. v. EveryMD.com LLC, Denying Request for Rehearing IPR2014-00347 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/12/2014
Due Process Requires Proper Service: Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Raymond Law Group LLC 7/12/2014
Supreme Court Decision in Riley Affects Cellphone Searches in Civil Litigation, Employment Matters Jackson Lewis P.C. 7/12/2014
Unilever, Inc. dba Unilever v. The Procter & Gamble Company: Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review IPR2014-00506 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/12/2014
ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA), Inc., Final Written Decision IPR2013-00133 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/11/2014
Michigan District Court Applies Michigan Statute of Limitations Despite Contractual Choice of Law Clause Varnum LLP 7/11/2014
Rackspace Hosting, Inc. v. Clouding IP, LLC, Denying Request for Rehearing of Decision on Institution CBM2014-00034 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/11/2014
New York District Court Lets Plaintiff Revive Mooted Claims In Second Action Against Same Defendants Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/11/2014
Louisiana Court of Appeals Holds Non-Compete Was Triggered When Employment Agreement Expired, Not When Actual Employment Ended Jackson Lewis P.C. 7/11/2014
American Exceptionalism and Extraterritorial Application of Bankruptcy Law Greenberg Traurig, LLP 7/11/2014
Redbox Collection of ZIP Codes Does Not Violate Song-Beverly Privacy Rights Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP 7/11/2014
Supreme Court Decision Highlights Definition of Closely Held Corporation McBrayer, McGinnis, Leslie and Kirkland, PLLC 7/11/2014
New Jersey Court Okays Provision in Job Application Reducing Statute of Limitations Proskauer Rose LLP 7/11/2014
PTO Litigation Center Report – July 11, 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. 7/11/2014
Brookshire Brothers, Ltd. v. Aldridge: The Texas Supreme Court Changes the Rules on Destroyed Evidence Andrews Kurth 7/11/2014
Intentionally Omitting Construction of Independent Claim Terms—Did This Cause the Denial of Apple’s Petition For Inter Partes Review? Armstrong Teasdale 7/11/2014
Facebook, Inc. v. Evolutionary Intelligence, LLC: Denying Request for Rehearing on Decision on Institution IPR2014-00093 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/11/2014
Supreme Court Rules Closely Held Businesses Shielded from Contraception Mandate Armstrong Teasdale 7/11/2014
Employee May Contract to Shorter Limitations Period for Discrimination Suits, New Jersey Court Holds Jackson Lewis P.C. 7/11/2014
Out of the Woodwork and Into Court: Even Applicants Can Sue for Retaliation Steptoe & Johnson PLLC 7/11/2014
California Supreme Court Limits Recovery for Employees Who Misrepresent Their Immigration Status Proskauer Rose LLP 7/11/2014
Patent Hold-Up or Patent Hold-Out? Judge Essex Adds His Voice to the SEP-FRAND Debate Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. 7/10/2014
Pennsylvania Superior Court Requires Additional Consideration for Non-Compete From Current Employee Steptoe & Johnson PLLC 7/10/2014
Supreme Court Rejects "Presumption of Prudence" in Employer Stock Drop Cases Godfrey & Kahn S.C. 7/10/2014
Seventh Circuit Remands FERC for the Second Time on Cost Allocation for High-Voltage Transmission Lines in PJM Schiff Hardin LLP 7/10/2014
California Truck Drivers Entitled to Meal Periods and Rest Breaks Jackson Lewis P.C. 7/10/2014
Proposed Legislation Introduced to Override Hobby Lobby Ruling Barnes & Thornburg LLP 7/10/2014
Salvage/Recycled Original Equipment Manufacture (OEM) Parts Held Not Covered Under West Virginia Crash Parts Act Steptoe & Johnson PLLC 7/10/2014
ZTE Corporation and ZTE (USA) Inc. v. ContentGuard Holdings, Inc.: Final Written Decision Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/10/2014
Eleventh Circuit Sustains Award To Employer In Whistleblower Case Proskauer Rose LLP 7/10/2014
PTO Litigation Center Report – July 10, 2014 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. 7/10/2014
Chicken Restaurant Case Serves Up A Bucket of Sound Contract Principles for Commercial Leases von Briesen & Roper, S.C. 7/10/2014
Texas Supreme Court Rules on Spoliation Instructions Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 7/10/2014
Ohio Judge: Mortgage Underwriters Properly Classified As Exempt Administrative Employees Jackson Lewis P.C. 7/10/2014
The Thorny Problem of Patentable Eligible Subject Matter: Part 3 of a 10-Part Series: India Michael Best & Friedrich LLP 7/10/2014
Redline Detection, LLC v. Star Envirotech, Inc., Final Written Decision Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/10/2014
Bank of America, N.A. v. Intellectual Ventures II LLC, Denying Request for Rehearing on Institution Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/9/2014
Supreme Court Shutters Internet Cable TV Streaming Service as Violation of Broadcasters’ Copyright Steptoe & Johnson PLLC 7/9/2014
Universal Remote Control, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc., Final Written Decision Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/9/2014
Xilinx, Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC, Final Written Decision Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 7/9/2014

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.