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
Jul
20
2020
Jiangsu Punishes Chinese Patent Agency for Patent Subject Matter Conflict Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jun
19
2014
CLS v Alice – Abstract Idea, Wherefore Art Thou? Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Apr
29
2016
Justice Breyer to Diagnostic Test Patentees – “Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here.” Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jun
12
2015
Ariosa v. Sequenom – Novel Genetic Analysis Fails The Mayo Test Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Dec
16
2022
EU Requests Establishment of WTO Panel in Chinese Anti-Suit Injunction Patent Cases Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
May
24
2013
CLS Bank International v. Alice Corporation: Poison Apple Re: Patent Litigation Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jan
12
2023
China’s Supreme People’s Court Releases Second Batch of Typical Civil Code Cases Including Piercing the Corporate Veil in a Trademark/Unfair Competition Case Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Oct
25
2020
China Releases Q3 2020 Patent Application Filing Data Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Nov
21
2019
Nuvo Pharms. v. Dr. Reddy’s Labs. – Catch 22 at the Federal Circuit? Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Oct
19
2018
Yeda Res. and Dev. v. Mylan – “We don’t need no Stinkin’ Prior Art” Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jul
10
2013
Supreme Court Decision Myriad Brings Out Its “Reserve Claims” To Challenge Ambry Re: Patent Eligibility Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Nov
11
2021
Beijing Intellectual Property Court Accepts China’s First Drug Patent Linkage Litigation Case Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jul
29
2015
Netflix, Inc. v. Rovi Corporation (NDCA 2015): Five TV Guide Patents Dropped by Abstract Idea Ineligibility Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Nov
24
2021
China’s Supreme People’s Court Clarifies IC Layout Design Rights Standing Requirements Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jan
13
2020
Supreme Court Denies Cert. in Vanda, Berkheimer and Athena Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Apr
5
2011
Federal Court Hears Myriad Gene Case This Morning Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Oct
3
2011
Cordis v. BSC – Therasense at Work Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Oct
31
2016
Chisum and Mueller Dissect The Recent En Banc Decision In Apple v Samsung – “Smartphone Wars: Federal Circuit Shenanigans?” Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Mar
25
2022
3-Year Prison Sentence Affirmed for 3M Mask Counterfeiter in Shanghai’s Third Intermediate People’s Court Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Apr
16
2020
New Balance Scores Chinese Unfair Competition Victory Against New Barlun Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Feb
21
2021
Burberry Wins Preliminary Injunction Against Baneberry at Suzhou, China’s Intermediate People’s Court for Trademark Infringement Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Apr
8
2022
Almirall v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals – Negative Limitations II Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
May
9
2012
Otsuka v. Sandoz – Motivation Trumps Structure Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Dec
12
2016
Intellectual Property: In re NuVasive – Explain Yourself! Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
May
12
2020
Guangdong Higher People’s Court Affirms 40 Million RMB Award on Utility Model Patent Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jan
8
2015
California District Court Refuses to Invalidate Gaming Patent as Encompassing an Abstract Idea Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jan
20
2015
Promega v. Life Technologies – “Too Much Of Nothing?” re: Patent Infringement Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Jan
21
2015
Teva v. Sandoz pt.II– The Dissent And The Zone Of Uncertainty 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