False Claims Act Insights - The Mathematics of Nuclear FCA Verdicts
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 316: Spotlight on Torts (Part 1 – Negligence)
The Future of Litigation: Adapting to the Era of Nuclear Verdicts
The Impact of the Horn Case on RICO - RICO Report Podcast
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 497: Listen and Learn -- Incidental, Reliance, and Restitution Damages (Contracts)
Podcast - Ohio State Senator Has a Bone to Pick with Court Ruling on Boneless Wings
False Claims Act Insights - Assessing the Fallout from a Thermonuclear FCA Verdict
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
The Briefing: Supreme Court Holds Copyright Damages Can Go Beyond 3 Years (Podcast)
The Briefing: Supreme Court Holds Copyright Damages Can Go Beyond 3 Years
Supreme Court to Settle Circuit Split Regarding RICO Damages Arising From Personal Injuries — RICO Report Podcast
RICO Damages — RICO Report Podcast
(Podcast) The Briefing: How Far Back Can You Go: Supreme Court to Decide Circuit Split on Recovery of Copyright Damages
The Briefing; How Far Back Can You Go: Supreme Court to Decide Circuit Split on Recovery of Copyright Damages
SDNY Chooses “Time Approach” to Calculating Lease Termination Damages Collectible Against a Bankrupt Estate
Using Expert Witnesses in FCRA Cases - FCRA Focus
#WorkforceWednesday: How to Pursue Damages in Trade Secrets Litigation - Employment Law This Week® - Spilling Secrets Podcast
How Do You Measure The Economic Value of Ecosystems?
Podcast: Discussing Florida Tort Reform with William Large and Tiffany Roddenberry
6 Key Takeaways | Presenting Damages in International Arbitration
In 2024, the Federal Circuit set forth a standard for determining whether extraterritorial sales activity could be considered in a reasonable royalty award for patent infringement. Here, we summarize the court’s opinion in...more
Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Qiagen Sciences, LLC, Appeal No. 2023-2350 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 13, 2025) - In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit reversed a jury finding of infringement from the District...more
Update: On September 28, 2021, Apotex applied to the Supreme Court of Canada for leave to appeal (Docket No. 39851). On July 23, 2021, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) dismissed Apotex’s appeal of the Federal Court’s (FC)...more
On November 20, 2019, the Federal Court (FC) issued its reconsideration decision on the quantum of damages owed by Apotex for its infringement of eight Eli Lilly process patents related to the antibiotic cefaclor: Eli Lilly...more
On Friday, June 28, 2019, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc. to decide whether a showing of willfulness is necessary to obtain a defendant’s profits under the Lanham Act....more
Under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), trademark holder who proves infringement may receive as damages an award of profits “subject to the principles of equity.” This phrase has divided the circuit courts going back several decades, with...more
A petition for writ of certiorari pending before the U.S. Supreme Court asks the Court to decide whether a plaintiff must prove willful infringement to obtain an award of a trademark infringer’s profits for a violation of 15...more
A recent order from the District of Delaware in Evolved Wireless, LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 15-00542 (“Evolved Wireless”) provides interesting guidance regarding the use of future sales in calculating lump-sum damages. This...more
On February 25, 2019, the Supreme Court denied Power Integrations, Inc.’s (“Power Integrations”) petition for writ of certiorari. The question presented to the Court was whether a plaintiff who had proven customer demand for...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Dyk, Taranto, and Stoll. Appeal from U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: The Federal Circuit lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a district court judgment...more
Assignor Estoppel Does Not Apply in the IPR Context - In Arista Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-1525, 2017-1577, the Federal Circuit held that the plain language of 35 U.S.C. § 311(a) unambiguously...more
In 2018 we reported on a number of developments in life sciences IP and regulatory law. Our most-read articles were: #1 a June update on biosimilars (authored by Urszula Wojtyra); #2 a “live” summary chart of Vanessa’s Law...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int’l, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2016-2691, 2017-1875 (Fed. Cir. July 3, 2018) - The Court affirmed a jury verdict of patent infringement and vacated a...more
The Canadian “accounting of profits” remedy for patent infringement, which is not available in the U.S., provides a potentially significant opportunity for companies with Canadian IP rights. Recent court decisions have...more
On February 8, 2018, the Federal Court of Appeal issued public reasons for its decision dismissing Teva’s appeal relating to the damages and costs awarded against it for its infringement of Janssen’s patent for levofloxacin...more
2017 was a year of significant developments to Canadian IP law and practice, with important court decisions and numerous legislative amendments. We have taken the opportunity to review the top 10 highlights from the past...more
The year 2017 was one of the most significant years for Canadian Life Sciences IP and Regulatory Law in Canada’s history. The year saw major developments in patent linkage, patent term, and substantive patent issues. As we...more
Claims Directed to Methods for Streaming Audiovisual Data Held Unpatentable Under § 101 - In Two-Way Media Ltd v. Comcast Cable Communications, Appeal Nos. 2016-2531, 2016-2532, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district...more
Proving that damages for design patent infringement can still be significant, Columbia Sportswear Co. was awarded more than $3 million last month by a California jury in a design patent infringement lawsuit against Seirus...more
Just when it seemed that we might have finally reached the end of the epic battle between Apple and Samsung in what was once called the “patent trial of the century,” the District Court for the Northern District of California...more
In 2011, Apple sued Samsung in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.) alleging that several Samsung smartphones infringed utility and design patents owned...more
Addressing the design patent battle between Apple and Samsung on remand from the Supreme Court of the United States, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit declined to apply the new standard or to order specific...more
In 2011, Apple sued Samsung alleging among other things that various portions of Samsung smartphone products infringed claims of certain design patents owned by Apple (Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.). In 2012,...more
On January 17, the Northern District of California approved the latest amendments to its Patent Local Rules, which became effective immediately. Traditionally seen as a thought leader on organizing and structuring patent...more
The U.S. Supreme Court in a unanimous 8-0 opinion reversed and remanded to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit an award to Apple, Inc. of $399 million of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.'s total profits on...more