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 Organization
May
19
2015
Don't Name Your Furniture Store After A Grocery Store Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP
May
19
2015
What Factors Do Courts Consider in Trademark Disputes? McBrayer, McGinnis, Leslie and Kirkland, PLLC
May
19
2015
Federal Circuit Finds No Direct Infringement Of Akamai Patents Foley & Lardner LLP
May
19
2015
Microsoft Google v. B.E. Technology: Final Written Decision IPR2014-00039 Faegre Drinker
May
18
2015
Additional Discovery In Inter Partes Reviews—Absolutely No Fishing Allowed Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
May
18
2015
There’s No Such Thing As a Free Sample Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
May
18
2015
ABS Global v. Inguran:Denying Institution Where Prior Art Provided Only a Possibility of a Claimed Feature IPR2015-00001 Faegre Drinker
May
18
2015
PTO Litigation Center Report – May 18, 2015 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
May
18
2015
John’s Lone Star Distribution v. Thermolife International: Additional Discovery Granted to Determine Real Party-In-Interest IPR2014-01201 Faegre Drinker
May
17
2015
Venture Capitalists Running Scared – HBO's Hooli Suing Pied Piper Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
May
15
2015
Patent-Eligibility of Computer Software Inventions in a Post-Alice Era Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP
May
15
2015
BMI Wins Summary Judgment of Copyright Infringement After Restaurant Owner Fails to Respond to Requests for Admission Proskauer Rose LLP
May
15
2015
PTO Litigation Center Report – May 15, 2015 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
May
15
2015
PTAB Clarifies Protocol for Expanded Post-Grant Panels Mintz
May
15
2015
Akamai v. Limelight: Federal Circuit Maintains “Single Entity” Status Quo Barnes & Thornburg LLP
May
14
2015
Federal Circuit Upholds Joint Infringement Defense in On-Going Akamai Litigation Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP
May
14
2015
Munchkin, Inc. and Toys “R” US, Inc. v. Luv N’ Care, LTD.: Design Patent Case Digest Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
May
14
2015
Small Businesses Need Help Protecting Intellectual Property Rights McBrayer, McGinnis, Leslie and Kirkland, PLLC
May
14
2015
More Biosimilar Q&A’s Released by FDA - Food and Drug Administration Mintz
May
14
2015
Square Inc v. J. Carl Cooper: Final Written Decision IPR2014-00158 Faegre Drinker
May
14
2015
FDA Issues Final Guidance on Biosimilars ArentFox Schiff LLP
May
14
2015
PTO Litigation Center Report – May 14, 2015 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
May
14
2015
Apple v. E-Watch: Decision Denying Institution IPR2015-00411 Faegre Drinker
May
14
2015
First Look At False Marking Under The AIA - America Invents Act Foley & Lardner LLP
May
13
2015
Chums and Croakies v. Cablz: Denying Motion for Leave to File Motion to Stay Prosecution IPR2014-01240 Faegre Drinker
May
13
2015
PTO Litigation Center Report – May 13, 2015 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
May
12
2015
The Antitrust Agencies’ Comments on the Patent System Covington & Burling LLP
May
12
2015
Daicel Corporation v. Celanese International Corporation: Denying Institution IPR2014-01515 Faegre Drinker
May
12
2015
Wavemarket Inc. d/b/a Location Labs v. LocatioNet Systems: Final Written Decision IPR2014-00199 Faegre Drinker
May
12
2015
PTO Litigation Center Report – May 12, 2015 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
May
12
2015
Daifuku Co., Ltd. and Daifuku America Corp. v. Murata Machinery, Ltd.: Denying Institution IPR2015-00084,87 Faegre Drinker
May
12
2015
California Supreme Court Scrutinizes Reverse Payment ANDA Settlements Foley & Lardner LLP
May
12
2015
Edmund Optics, Inc. v. Semrock, Inc., Granting Motion to Submit Supplemental Information IPR2014-00599 Faegre Drinker
May
11
2015
Third Party Observations in China – Part 7 of an 8 Part Series Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
May
11
2015
Samsung Electronics v. Smartflash LLC: Denying Leave to File Motion to Compel Routine Discovery CBM2014-00190 Faegre Drinker
 

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