Hospice Insights Podcast - Hospice Audit Updates: Hospices Fare Well in Federal Court
Nationwide FLSA Lawsuits Just Got Harder—Here’s Why - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Daily Compliance News: August 1, 2025, The All AI Edition
The Journey of Litigation
Quick Guide to Administrative Hearings
Wire Fraud Litigants Beware: Fourth Circuit Ruling Protects the Banks — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Solicitors General Insights: The Tale of Two Washingtons — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
How confidential is a request to access or challenge information in INTERPOL’s files?
Understanding the Impact of IPR Estoppel and PTAB Discretionary Denials — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 64 - Cages We Built: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America
Solicitors General Insights: The Legal Frontlines in Iowa and Indiana — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
(Podcast) The Briefing: The Ninth Circuit Puts the Brakes on Eleanor’s Copyright Claim
The Briefing: The Ninth Circuit Puts the Brakes on Eleanor’s Copyright Claim
(Podcast) The Briefing: No CTRL-ALT-DEL For the Server Test
The Briefing: No CTRL-ALT-DEL For the Server Test
Navigating PTAB’s New Approach to IPR and PGR Discretionary Denial - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Solicitors General Insights: A Deep Dive With Mississippi and Tennessee Solicitors General — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Update on the State of Non-compete Restrictions (LaborSpeak)
UPIC Audits
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prominent Journalist, David Dayen, Describes his Reporting on the Efforts of Trump 2.0 to Curb CFPB
The Federal Circuit recently vacated a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board after concluding that the board’s analysis of licensing evidence offered as a secondary consideration of nonobviousness constituted legal...more
This Federal Circuit opinion analyzes various key issues in patent litigation, including the role of applicant admitted prior art (“AAPA”), standing, and obviousness. Background - Shockwave Medical, Inc. (“Shockwave”)...more
Effective 1 September 2025, all hearings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) will be conducted in person. Parties involved must attend these hearings physically and in person unless they can demonstrate a valid...more
SHOCKWAVE MED., INC., V. CARDIOVASCULAR SYS., INC. - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Cunningham. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2019-00405. In inter partes review...more
IGT v. Zynga Inc., Appeal No. 2023-2262 (Fed. Cir. July 22, 2025) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit examined the reviewability and merits of the Patent Trial Appeal Board’s decision to institute inter...more
The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has announced that, effective September 1, all PTAB hearings will be conducted in person at USPTO offices, marking a departure from the virtual and hybrid formats adopted in recent...more
Shockwave Medical, Inc. v. Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., et al., Nos. 2023-1864, -1940 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) July 14, 2025). Opinion by Dyk, joined by Lourie and Cunningham....more
In the past few months, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) Acting Director has made substantial changes to the process for, and factors considered in, exercising discretion to deny institution of an inter partes...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit clarified that while applicant-admitted prior art (AAPA) may be cited as evidence of general background knowledge in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, it cannot serve as...more
Insulet v EOFlow UPC_CoA_768/2024 (Ord_69078/2024) The Unified Patent Court (UPC) Court of Appeal has issued a significant decision that provides important guidance on the interpretation of patent claims in UPC...more
The Federal Circuit recently issued a precedential decision in Shockwave Med., Inc. v. Cardiovascular Sys., Inc. (CSI), affirming-in-part and reversing-in-part the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) decision, and...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding of noninfringement, concluding that the patent owner had improperly raised a claim construction issue for the first time on appeal – an...more
In Dolby Laboratories Licensing Corporation V. Unified Patents, LLC, Appeal No. 23-2110, the Federal Circuit held that a patent owner lacks Article III standing to appeal an inter partes review decision on patentability when...more
Acting Director of the USPTO Coke Morgan Stewart recently discretionarily denied institution of an inter partes review (IPR) based on a new consideration, “settled expectations,” that is, the length of time that the...more
On June 30, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC, reversing the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) claim construction of the phrase “consisting...more
In a decision that underscores the primacy of prosecution history to determine claim scope, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s interpretation of the transitional phrase...more
On May 12, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Regents of the Univ. of California v. Broad Inst., Inc.1 concerning the ongoing priority dispute relating to competing inventor groups for the CRISPR-Cas9 eukaryotic...more
EYE THERAPIES, LLC v. SLAYBACK PHARMA LLC - Before Taranto, Stoll and Scarsi (sitting by designation). The patent’s prosecution history required a restrictive interpretation of the term “consisting essentially of.”...more
Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC, Appeal No. 2023-2173 (Fed. Cir. June 30, 2025) In its only precedential patent opinion last week, the Federal Circuit reviewed construction of the transitional claim phrase...more
On May 12, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) revived the Regents of the University of California’s (Regents) challenge to the Broad Institute’s CRISPR-Cas9 patents, overturning a 2022 decision by...more
In an appeal from an inter partes review, the Federal Circuit recently clarified that the enablement inquiry applied to prior art references in the context of an anticipation defense differs from the enablement inquiry...more
CrowdStrike, Inc. v. GoSecure, Inc., Nos. IPR2025-00068, -00070 (June 25, 2025) (designated informative on June 26, 2025). Order by Stewart, Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Acting Director of...more
DOLBY LABORATORIES LICENSING CORPORATION v. UNIFIED PATENTS, LLC - Before Moore, Clevenger and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. A patent owner lacks Article III standing to appeal an inter partes review...more
In this episode of the Post-Grant Podcast, Andy Zappia, Nick Gallo, and Bryan Smith explore the evolving landscape of estoppel in inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR) proceedings at the Patent Trial and...more
INCYTE CORPORATION v. SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES, INC. - Before Moore, Hughes, and Cunningham. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Speculative plans for potentially infringing activity are insufficient to...more