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
Sep
19
2020
China’s Supreme People’s Court Releases Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Administrative Cases Concerning Patent Grant and Confirmation Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Apr
10
2024
3.5-Year Prison Sentence for Counterfeiting Maotai, the National Drink of China Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jul
2
2013
Ultramercial v. Hulu – Judge Rader Clips the Wings of the “Abstract Idea” Exception to Software Invention Eligibility Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Sep
17
2014
Genetic Technologies v. LabCorp. – Mayo Redux Re: Patent Litigation Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jan
11
2020
Jaguar Land Rover Successfully Invalidates Chinese Design Patent for Landwind X7 Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Sep
30
2014
American Calcar v. Amer. Honda Motor Co. – Therasense Goes Out For a Test Drive Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Aug
29
2016
Alice v. CLS Bank Software Patents Scorecard, Two Years Later Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
May
22
2023
Supreme Court Voids Amgen’s Patents using “Undue Experimentation” Standard Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Oct
10
2014
Card Verification v. Citigroup: Software Patent Survives 12(b)(6) Abstract Idea Attack Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Feb
18
2020
China’s Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Christian Louboutin’s Red Sole Trademark Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Sep
30
2015
Shire v. Amneal Pharma – Adjusting the Rearview Mirror Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jan
8
2019
USTPO Releases Proposed Revised Section 101 Eligibility Guidelines Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Mar
20
2012
Supreme Court Reverses In Prometheus v. Mayo! Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Dec
12
2014
Supreme Court to Review Post-Expiration Date Royalties in Kimble v. Marvell Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Apr
23
2022
China Releases Several Provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Jurisdiction of Intellectual Property Cases of First Instance Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Mar
25
2019
Ex parte Hazokaki – Big Data Correlations in Abstract Idea “Clothing” Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Oct
9
2012
Patentability of Obvious Variants of Derived Knowledge Under the AIA Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Feb
20
2015
Pacing Technologies v. Garmin – D&D Explained Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jul
28
2022
Even the Chinese Government isn’t Safe from Counterfeiters: China Cracks Down on Counterfeit Mail Trucks Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jun
2
2021
China’s National Copyright Administration Releases Top Ten Criminal Infringement and Piracy Cases of 2020 Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jul
28
2021
Chemours Co. v. Daikin Industries – Back to Some IP Basics 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.
Apr
18
2016
Limelight Networks v. Akamai Tech. – Supreme Court Cert. Denied Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Aug
4
2014
Ignorance is Bliss – for Teva re: Structural Obviousness in Patent Cases Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
May
27
2017
Supreme Court Interprets Patent Venue Statute in Unanimous Opinion Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Sep
10
2020
China’s Qiaodan Sports Loses in Attempt to Enforce Michael Jordan Trademarks Against Amazon 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
12
2015
OIP Technologies Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc, (Fed. Cir. 2012-1696) 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