News & Analysis as of

Cross-Border Transactions Appeals

Hogan Lovells

Aggregate / Furst – Successfully disputing recognition of Restructuring Plan

Hogan Lovells on

Project Fürst purported to restructure its liabilities of over EUR 1 billion, for which the developer relocated to London in order to implement a “Restructuring Plan” under the English Part 26A regime. The Restructuring Plan...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Recent 5th Circuit Opinion Demonstrates Usefulness of 28 U.S.C. § 1782 in Foreign Enforcement Proceedings

In Banco Mercantil De Norte, S.A. et al. v. Juan Jose Paramo, the Fifth Circuit recently affirmed a Texas district court’s denial of a motion to quash a 28 U.S.C. § 1782 subpoena issued to Juan Jose Paramo, a Mexican national...more

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP

SCC Clarifies Contract-Based Jurisdiction in Cross-Border Disputes

In Sinclair v. Venezia Turismo (Sinclair), the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) clarified when Canadian courts can assume jurisdiction over international or interprovincial disputes. A contract made in a Canadian province and...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Skadden's 2020 Insights

Despite political and economic uncertainties, markets and deal activity were resilient in 2019, and strong fundamentals remain in place heading into 2020. Companies continue to face a challenging litigation and enforcement...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Cross-Border Investigations Update - September 2019

This issue of Skadden’s semiannual Cross-Border Investigations Update takes a close look at recent cases, regulatory activity and other key developments, including a review of the first year of GDPR enforcement, analysis of...more

Barnea Jaffa Lande & Co.

Dramatic Decision on the Taxation of Trusts in Israel

The Tel Aviv District Court handed down a decision a few days ago rejecting the Israel Tax Authority’s (ITA) position on the conveyance of real estate properties to trusts. This decision dramatically changes the taxation of...more

White & Case LLP

2018 Half-year in review: M&A legal and market developments

White & Case LLP on

We set out in the attached Newsletter a number of interesting English court decisions and market developments which have taken place in the second half of 2018 and their impact on M&A transactions. This review looks at these...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

Securities Law/Commodities Exchange Act (CEA) - The World in U.S. Courts: Summer-Fall 2018

Giunta v. Dingman, US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, June 19, 2018 - As relevant here, plaintiff Erik Gordon sued Dingman in New York, alleging that Dingman violated US securities laws in connection with his sale...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Social Media

The Coming Border Wars: U.S. Court Decision Refusing to Enforce Canadian Court Order Highlights the Growing Balkanization of the...

Does a search engine operator have to delist websites hosting, without authorization, your trade secret materials or other intellectual property? The answer may depend on where you sue—just ask Google. The U.S. District Court...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

‘Home Country’ Arbitration Clause More Trouble Than It’s Worth?

Courts in many countries, including the U.S., generally enforce contracts with clauses specifying international arbitration as the preferred avenue for resolving disputes. Accordingly, when drafting such provisions, due...more

Knobbe Martens

Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp.: Supreme Court Limits Patent Infringement Liability for Suppliers Under § 271(f)(1)

Knobbe Martens on

The Supreme Court in Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp held that providing a single component of a multicomponent invention for manufacture abroad does not give rise to patent infringement liability under 35 U.S.C. §...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

One is Not Enough – Infringement Liability under § 271(f)(1)

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp., Slip Op. 14-1538 (Feb. 22, 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the supply of a single component of a multicomponent invention for manufacture abroad does not give rise to...more

Burr & Forman

Supreme Court Decision Limits Patent Infringement Risk for Exporting a Single Component of a Multi-Component Invention

Burr & Forman on

On February 22, 2017, the Supreme Court held that there is no patent infringement when an entity supplies "a single component" from the United States for combination into "a multicomponent invention" outside the United...more

Jones Day

Supreme Court Addresses Scope of Patent Infringement Under Section 271(f)(1)

Jones Day on

Section 271(f)(1) of the Patent Act provides that a party infringes a patent claim when it "supplies or causes to be supplied in or from the United States all or a substantial portion of the components of a patented invention...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

"US Supreme Court Holds That Exporting One Component of Invention Abroad Does Not Suffice for Patent Infringement"

In a 7-0 decision issued on February 22, 2017, in Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp., the U.S. Supreme Court held that exporting a single component of a multicomponent invention for combination abroad does not give rise...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Supreme Court Reins in International Supplier Liability under U.S. Patent Law

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On February 22, 2017, the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous opinion in Life Technologies. Corp. v. Promega Corp., 580 U.S. ___ (2017) (Roberts, C.J., recused), holding that manufacturing and exporting a single component...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Litigation Alert: The Supreme Court Reverses Federal Circuit Ruling on Extraterritorial Patent Infringement

Fenwick & West LLP on

In an opinion that will likely give peace of mind to businesses shipping products from the U.S. abroad, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for a unanimous Supreme Court, reversed the Federal Circuit in Life Technologies v....more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Supreme Court Reverses § 271(f)(1) Ruling in Biotech Case

In Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega, the Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s interpretation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(f)(1), and held that a single component does not constitute a “substantial portion of the components of...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Inducement and Risk of Liability for Worldwide Sales

The Supreme Court of the United States agreed to review a decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding active inducement infringement under 35 USC § 271(f)(1) in a case important to US manufacturers...more

Quinn Emanuel

Business Litigation Report - June 2016

Quinn Emanuel on

Federal Circuit Recognizes New, but Limited, Privilege for Patent Agent Communications - Introduction - Patent agents are licensed to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), and...more

Quinn Emanuel

Australia: An Increasingly Attractive Plaintiffs’ Forum for Securities Class Actions

Quinn Emanuel on

The United States has long been the primary home for securities class actions around the world. This trend, however, was curtailed to some degree with the Supreme Court decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank, 130 S....more

Proskauer Rose LLP

Third Circuit Defines "Extraterritorial" Applicability of Federal Securities Laws in United States v. Georgiou

Proskauer Rose LLP on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit added its voice yesterday to the ongoing judicial effort to construe the U.S. Supreme Court's 2010 decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank, concerning the extent to...more

22 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide