Intellectual Property

Intellectual property disputes take place on a daily basis in a variety of venues. From an employee’s right to a patent of company-developed products to patent wars between international companies for illegal use of a product/logo, the National Law Review is a great resource for updates on all things IP. The site covers litigation at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the  Patent Trial and Board Appeals (PTAB), as well as cases in front of the International Trade Commission (ITC) for international patent disputes. The National Law Review covers cases heard by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), or appeals which are now sitting in front of the patent-board on Inter partes review (IPR). Additionally, the National Law Review covers cases and decisions of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

Copyrights, patent infringement claims, trade secrets, false advertising claims, unfair competition, and intellectual property laws which govern patent-litigation, are all areas which the National Law Review covers, in detail for readers. Patent disputes don’t only occur in the United States. When international countries including the United Kingdom, Brazil, China, India, and the European Union get involved, international laws are also taken into consideration by the PTO. Additionally, information on how to obtain patent protection internationally is also available on the National Law Review.

Intellectual property news on the National Law Review spans from topics including biosimilars, domain name registration, generic top-level domains (gTLDs), drug patents, non-compete agreements, trade secrets, and other industry-related battles which ensue, are covered on the site. Visitors can read about the latest legislation, laws, and news, as it relates to patents and intellectual property in general. Further, visitors to the National Law Review are going to find the latest stories and litigation as it unfolds in front of patent courts across the land. From email and data retention policies, patent disputes over medical devices, cloud computing and artificial intelligence the National Law Review has the details and expert intellectual property litigation legal analysis readers count on.

For hourly updates on the latest news about Intellectual Property Law, IP Litigation, Patent Legislation, and more, be sure to follow our IP Law Twitter feed, and sign up for complimentary e-news bulletins.

Custom text Title Sort descending Organization
Oct
1
2019
A Patent-Eligible Diagnostic Method Claim Foley & Lardner LLP
Mar
28
2018
A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words, but Owning a Piece of the Bundle Is Priceless. McDermott Will & Emery
Mar
27
2024
A Port in the Infringement Storm: When 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1)’s Safe Harbor Applies Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
Jan
22
2014
A Possible New Trademark Exception to the Corporate Discharge Greenberg Traurig, LLP
Aug
29
2014
A Powerful Tool: Challenging Assertion during Patent Prosecution Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP
Feb
16
2020
A Practical Guide to the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 Finnegan
Sep
3
2021
A Preamble Held Limiting Based on the Patentee’s Arguments in a Prior Appeal and File History Finnegan
May
4
2014
A Primer On Claim Amendments in Post-Grant Review McDermott Will & Emery
Sep
30
2015
A Primer on Patent Damages: Carnegie Mellon University v. Marvell Technology Group, Ltd., et al. McDermott Will & Emery
Apr
12
2013
A Primer on Policing Your Trademark Mintz
Jun
30
2022
A Primer on Practice at the Trademark Trial & Appeal Board McDermott Will & Emery
Mar
15
2017
A Prior Art Reference that Merely Suggests the Claimed Subject Matter Does Not Anticipate the Claims Hunton Andrews Kurth
Jan
28
2019
A Private Sale is Still a Sale – SCOTUS Affirms the Federal Circuit for a Change Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP
Feb
6
2018
A Problem That Can’t Seem to Get Cracked Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP
Dec
13
2023
A Proposed Likeness Law Paves the Way for a New Federal Right of Action Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP
May
1
2014
A Prosecution History Without Express Disclaimers Still Informs Claim Construction re: Intellectual Property McDermott Will & Emery
Nov
2
2012
A Public Icon: Marilyn Monroe Estate Loses Appeal for Publicity Rights McDermott Will & Emery
Oct
10
2012
A Range of Possible Dates for Alleged Prior Art Does Not Satisfy Standard of Clear and Convincing Evidence for Proving Invalidity McDermott Will & Emery
Apr
7
2021
A Real Party-in-Interest Determination is Final and Non-Appealable, Including Denial of Related Motion to Dismiss and Discovery Finnegan
Nov
14
2012
A Recall Notice Directed to “6 Hour” Energy Shots Could Constitute False Advertising McDermott Will & Emery
Sep
17
2012
A Red-Leather Day: Giving Single Color Trademarks in the Fashion Industry a Little Sole Bracewell LLP
Apr
8
2020
A registered copyright is the only way to guard against infringement Raymond Law Group LLC
Nov
4
2021
A Reminder of Doctrine of Equivalents in Biotechnology: Jennewein Biotechnologie GmbH v. International Trade Commission Proskauer Rose LLP
Jul
29
2021
A Reminder to Patentees Suing for Infringement: Your Allegations Must be Sufficient to Show Plausibility that the Accused Product Infringes Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP
Nov
20
2014
A Report from the “Biosimilars and Biotech: MENA Conference” in Istanbul, Turkey: Part 1 Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
Oct
14
2015
A Review of the Patent Related Provisions of the TPP – Patentable Subject Matter and Grace Periods Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
Oct
27
2014
A Review of the Status of Biosimilars in the U.S. Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
Sep
15
2020
A Right Royal Rejection: “Royal Butler” Trade Mark Application Denied in The UK K&L Gates
Jan
1
2014
A Road Test of the New PTAB (Patent Trial and Appeals Board) and a Road Map for Future IPR’s (Inter Partes Review) McDermott Will & Emery
Jan
4
2023
A Royal Pain: Contingent Royalties Held to be Dischargeable in Mallinckrodt Bracewell LLP
Aug
21
2015
A Royalty By Any Other Name: Post-Expiration Payments After Kimble v. Marvel Foley & Lardner LLP
May
18
2020
A Rubric for Design Patent Claim Construction to a “Tee” Foley & Lardner LLP
Aug
20
2018
A Sales Agent’s Home Office May Qualify as a Regular and Established Place of Business Mintz
May
4
2015
A Scandalous Mark to Some, Free Speech to Others: Federal Circuit to Decide Whether Controversial Limit on Trademark Registrations Violates First Amendment Mintz
Mar
1
2015
A Second Look At The Innovation Act Obviousness Type Double Patenting Statute Foley & Lardner LLP
Sep
18
2017
A Seismic Shift in UK Patent Infringement Law - Actavis v. Eli Lilly Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
Mar
21
2012
A Sharply Divided En Banc Federal Circuit Decision Limits Intervening Rights To Claims Textually Modified in Reexamination Hunton Andrews Kurth
Feb
11
2021
A Shoe-In? Fleet Feet Gives Injunction Appeal the Moot Boot McDermott Will & Emery
Jun
6
2013
A Short Primer on Amending Patent Contentions in the Eastern District of North Carolina Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP
Dec
31
2013
A Short-Lived Victory for Generic Manufacturers? – Part 2 Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
Jul
1
2015
A Single Entity Must Perform All Steps of a Method Claim in Order to Commit Direct Patent Infringement McDermott Will & Emery
Jun
22
2023
A Single Picture Database Is Worth a Thousand Statutory Damages Awards McDermott Will & Emery
Apr
25
2019
A Special “Treatment” for Patent Eligibility McDermott Will & Emery
Mar
26
2018
A Split Panel of the Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB Finding of Unpatentability Without Remand in DSS v. Apple Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
Nov
16
2023
A Step Forward for Choreography and Copyright McDermott Will & Emery
Aug
13
2012
A Sticky Situation—Secondary Considerations Require NEXUS to the Claimed Invention McDermott Will & Emery
Apr
6
2021
A Strike Against the Sandbox: Practical Results of Oracle v. Google Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP
Aug
5
2012
A Substantial Non-Infringing Use Does Not Preclude a Finding of Inducement McDermott Will & Emery
Dec
2
2015
A Substantially Pure Isomer Is Obvious When the Completely Pure Isomer Is Known In The Art: Spectrum Pharms., Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. McDermott Will & Emery
May
29
2015
A Sucking Sound on Domain Names: .SUCKS is Open for Registration Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP
 

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