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
Dec
2
2015
Patent Applicant Must Provide Clear Evidence to Antedate a Prior Art Reference In re: Steed et al. McDermott Will & Emery
Apr
29
2012
Patent Applicants Can Submit New Evidence to District Court in Civil Actions McDermott Will & Emery
May
28
2012
Patent Applicants Can Submit New Evidence to the District Court in Civil Actions Under §145 McDermott Will & Emery
Sep
3
2010
Patent Applicants Should Fully Describe Their Inventions in Originally Filed Applications - Ariad Pharm. Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co. (Fed. Cir. 2010) Vedder Price
Sep
14
2020
Patent Application Declarations for Unavailable or Uncooperative Inventors Mintz
May
26
2011
Patent Application Drafting for International Prosecution: Practice Tips Vedder Price
Jun
18
2019
Patent Application Not Fatal To Trade Secret Claims, Federal Court Rules Bracewell LLP
May
3
2016
Patent Applications: Prior Art and Continuation-in-Part Claims Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP
Oct
14
2019
Patent Attacks Against Open Source Intensify! Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
Nov
17
2023
Patent Bar: New Changes Up Ahead for Design Patent Practitioners Proskauer Rose LLP
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.
Jun
3
2015
Patent Board Relies on Non-Analogous Art Argument in Upholding Claims in Post-Grant Challenge Armstrong Teasdale
Mar
31
2015
Patent Board to Parties: “Call Me” - FLIR Systems v. Leak Surveys McDermott Will & Emery
Mar
30
2015
Patent Board Willing to Admit Questionable Evidence in Close Cases: Fujian Newland v. Hand Held Products McDermott Will & Emery
Aug
25
2015
Patent Board’s Proposed New Rules for PTAB Trials Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
Mar
10
2021
Patent Buyers Beware: Supreme Court Ruling in Hologic May Merit Additional Contractual Protections Mintz
Jul
4
2013
Patent Case Denied Transfer- Northern District of Georgia Agrees with Southern District of Florida that the Value of Document Location in Considering Transfer Motions Is Accorded Little Weight in Electronic Era Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP
Aug
2
2021
Patent Case Law Updates - August 2021 von Briesen & Roper, s.c.
Nov
6
2021
Patent Case Law Updates – November 2021 von Briesen & Roper, s.c.
Apr
18
2013
Patent Case Transferred from Eastern District of Texas to Northern District of Georgia Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP
Jul
15
2015
Patent Case Transferred From Georgia, Plaintiff's Principal Place of Business, To California, Defendant's Principal Place of Business Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP
Jan
22
2015
Patent Claim Construction Now Subject to Hybrid Review: Teva Pharmaceutical v. Sandoz McDermott Will & Emery
May
9
2016
Patent Claim for Rapid Display of Geospatial Data is Abstract, but Patent-Eligible under Alice Test Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP
Aug
1
2013
Patent Claim Limitations Must be Substantially Similar for a Previous Disclaimer to Apply: Regents of the Univ. of Minn. v. AGA Med. Corp. McDermott Will & Emery
Apr
9
2019
Patent Claim Preamble Lessons from Arctic Cat Inc. v. GEP Power Products Mintz
Dec
15
2015
Patent Claim Preambles Post-Alice Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP
Jun
28
2013
Patent Claim Terms Are Literally Interpreted McDermott Will & Emery
Aug
30
2013
Patent Claims Are Indefinite Where Claimed “Molecular Weight” Subject to Different Calculations McDermott Will & Emery
Nov
14
2017
Patent Claims Directed to Streaming Audio/Visual Data Service Found to Be Ineligible Subject Matter Under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Hunton Andrews Kurth
Mar
31
2012
Patent Claims Must Recite “Significantly More” than a Law of Nature McDermott Will & Emery
Nov
25
2014
Patent Co-Owners Are Necessary Parties to Infringement Suits, but Cannot Ordinarily Be Involuntarily Joined McDermott Will & Emery
Jun
10
2014
Patent Co-Owner’s Refusal to Join Suit Defeats Standing to Sue for Patent Infringement Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
Oct
31
2022
Patent Considerations and the Metaverse ArentFox Schiff LLP
Aug
19
2013
Patent Court Further Muddies the Software Patent Waters Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP
Mar
30
2018
Patent Damages: How Many Essential Features in a Smart Phone? Mintz
 

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