Litigation

HB Ad Slot
HB Mobile Ad Slot

The National Law Review is a no-log-in resource of legal articles addressing litigation, trial practice, appellate practice, and alternative dispute resolution. We provide legal news on the most recent litigated business and commercial cases including antitrust, banking and financial institutions, construction, complex disputes/class actions involving multi-parties and multi-jurisdictions, communications, employment law, environmental actions, government enforcement defense, insurance, intellectual property, mergers and business combinations, products liability, professional liability, real estate and development, environmental, securities enforcement, white-collar criminal actions, and trust and estate litigation. Details of actions by federal and state and local regulatory agencies as well as private actions from across the U.S. are added daily.

The legal experts who write for the National Law Review cover the federal circuit courts as well as the Supreme Court, analyzing the decisions and opinions from the justices at these levels and parsing the meaning and greater context of these decisions.  For coverage of the circuit courts and the decisions at the Supreme Court, the National Law Review has breaking news coverage of these issues. Additionally, coverage of litigation as a process, including rules of evidence, jury selection, and information on expert witnesses is available on the site.

Along with traditional litigation, the National Law Review also covers alternate dispute resolution (ADR), as well as the viability of Arbitration Agreements in a variety of contexts. The benefits of mediation as opposed to litigation, and the benefits of arbitration.  Compulsory arbitration clauses in agreements relating to major corporations, shareholder agreements, or multinational agreements, are covered on the National Law Review.

Additionally, the National Law Review covers trends in -e-discovery and regulations in document analysis and trial preparation. 

We also serve as a resource for the latest developments in civil proceduree-discovery, trial practice, appellate practice, and alternative dispute resolution, including mediation and arbitration involving both binding adversarial proceedings and non-binding voluntary procedures before neutral third parties.

National Law Review Litigation & Class Action Law TwitterFor hourly updates on the latest news about Litigation, Class Action Law Suits, Appellate Rulings, TCPA, and more, be sure to follow our Litigation Law X (formerly Twitter) feed, and sign up for complimentary e-news bulletins.

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

Title
Custom text Organization Sort descending
Apr
21
2017
Novartis AG, LTS et al. v. Noven Pharmaceuticals, Inc. – Prior Judicial Opinions Don’t Bind the PTAB Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Apr
18
2016
Limelight Networks v. Akamai Tech. – Supreme Court Cert. Denied Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jul
18
2014
Digitech Image Technologies, LLC v. Electronics For Imaging, Inc. — Data Structures Per Se Not Patentable Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Sep
4
2020
China’s Yaohai District Market Supervision Bureau Issues 20 Million RMB Fine for Trademark Infringement Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Sep
13
2020
China’s Supreme People’s Court Releases Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Trial of Civil Cases of Infringement of Trade Secrets Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Aug
4
2014
Ignorance is Bliss – for Teva re: Structural Obviousness in Patent Cases Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jun
12
2015
OIP Technologies Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc, (Fed. Cir. 2012-1696) Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Aug
15
2014
Recent Grants in Electronic Commerce Technology Group Provide Evidence that At Least “Technical Inventions” Still Pass Muster Under Alice Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jun
16
2016
Patent Prosecution: “Unclean Hands” Doctrine Erases Merck’s Damage Award Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Oct
26
2021
Zhejiang, China Fines Hangzhou Patent Firm for Not Withdrawing 164 Abnormal Patent Applications and Suspicion of Filing 1,192 Abnormal Applications in Total Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jun
15
2013
Association For Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics – An Isolated Local Difficulty? Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Nov
13
2021
How Fast is the Patent Prosecution Highway in China? Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Dec
10
2019
Solicitor General Signals Supreme Court to Address the Confusion Caused by the Abstract Idea Exception to 101 Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jul
25
2013
Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Authorizes SAP to file Opposition to Versata’s Rehearing Request Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Nov
18
2018
Ancora v HTC America: restriction computer operations with license limitation eligible under Section 101 Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Dec
14
2021
Non-Prosecution Agreement Announced in Underwriters Laboratories (UL) Chinese Criminal Copyright Case Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Sep
1
2013
WildTangent Files its Supreme Court Certiorari Petition in Patent Infringement Case – Part 1 Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Sep
29
2014
Planet Blue v. Namco – Abstract at the “Point of Novelty” re: Patent Litigation Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Mar
31
2011
Patent Owner Reexamination Requests with Parallel Litigation Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Sep
6
2016
District of Massachusetts Court Extends Myriad to Peptide Panels Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
May
8
2011
What Were They Thinking? A Second Look at Lilly v. Sun Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Mar
9
2020
Advocacy vs. Candor Paves the Road to Inequitable Conduct Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jun
7
2011
Reexamination Practice: One Size Does Not Fit All Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Oct
21
2014
Patent Board Denies First Data Corp. IPR Petitions Based on Real Party In Interest and One-Year Bar Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Sep
26
2016
Vanda v. Roxane Labs. – Are Two Natural Laws Better Than One? Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Feb
7
2019
Mayo Wins in Another s. 101 Appeal – Discovery of a Useful Natural Correlation is not Patent Eligible Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jan
16
2014
Stories I Missed In 2013 Re: Intellectual Property Law Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Oct
27
2016
Hillary Believes In The Patent System Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
 

NLR Logo

We collaborate with the world's leading lawyers to deliver news tailored for you. Sign Up to receive our free e-Newsbulletins

 

Sign Up for e-NewsBulletins