News & Analysis as of

Disclaimers Appeals

Lathrop GPM

Minnesota Appeals Court Rules on Property Disclaimers - An Unheralded But Key Estate Planning Tool

Lathrop GPM on

On April 28, 2025, the Minnesota Court of Appeals issued its opinion in In re Estate of Bogren. The court addressed a matter of first impression in Minnesota – whether a disclaimer of property must clearly state the value of...more

BCLP

Federal Circuit Clarifies Limits of Prosecution Disclaimer in Patent Families

BCLP on

In Maquet Cardiovascular LLC v. Abiomed Inc., 131 F.4th 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2025), the Federal Circuit addressed whether the prosecution history of one patent in a patent family can limit the scope of claims in a different patent...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Prosecution Disclaimer Alive and Well, Especially in Closed Claim

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s noninfringement determination, finding that the presence of a disclaimed compound in the accused product precluded infringement. Azurity Pharm., Inc....more

Offit Kurman

Trustee's Standing in Estate Distribution: A Legal Analysis of Estate of Barry Tarlow

Offit Kurman on

In a groundbreaking decision that could reshape the landscape of California estate law, the Court of Appeal in the Second District Division Four has ruled in favor of trustee David Henry Simon, affirming his right to seek a...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Social Media

Supreme Court Clarifies The Boundaries Of Public Official Liability On Social Media

In its recent opinion in Lindke v. Freed, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed when public officials may be held liable for violating the First Amendment for silencing critics on social media. The Court held that a public...more

Holtzman Vogel Baran Torchinsky & Josefiak

Supreme Court Issues Key Decisions on Public Officials’ Use of Social Media and Ability to Block Commenters

On March 15, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Lindke v. Freed and a per curiam opinion in O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier addressing when a public official may prevent a person from commenting on the public...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Espresso Yourself: When Prosecution History as a Whole Doesn’t Demonstrate Clear, Unmistakable Disclaimer

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a district court’s claim construction and related summary judgment rulings after determining that the district court erred in construing a claim term by...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - September 2022

INVT SPE LLC v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, Appeal No. 2020-1903 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 31, 2022) - In its only precedential patent case last week, the Federal Circuit issued a lengthy opinion that revolved around claims that are drawn...more

Miller Canfield

Michigan Court of Appeals Decision Cautions Need for Review of Arbitration Agreements in Employee Handbooks

Miller Canfield on

​​​​​​​On June 23, 2022, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that an arbitration agreement contained in a personnel manual was not enforceable because the associated disclaimer indicated that the manual did not create a...more

Perkins Coie

The Ninth Circuit Addresses Website Design for Enforceable Terms of Service

Perkins Coie on

Many companies use browsewrap or related sign-in agreements to present their terms of service for consumer acceptance. On April 5, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit refined the standard for enforcing terms...more

Knobbe Martens

Sounding Off: Prosecution Disclaimer Requires Unambiguous Intrinsic Evidence

Knobbe Martens on

GENUINE ENABLING TECHNOLOGY LLC V. NINTENDO CO., LTD - Before Newman, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the Western District of Washington. Summary: A finding of prosecution disclaimer must be supported by an unambiguous...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Cementing Victory by Accepting Defeat: When Can a Patentee’s Infringement Disclaimer Moot an Appeal of an IPR Decision?

A recent Federal Circuit case, ABS Global, Inc., v. Cytonome/ST, LLC, answered the interesting question of whether a patentee’s infringement disclaimer can moot a challenger’s appeal of an inter partes review (“IPR”)...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Rescinding a Specification Disclaimer Introduces New Matter

Fenwick & West LLP on

A recent case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit serves as an important reminder of the distinction between a disclaimer introduced in the specification of a patent and a disclaimer introduced during...more

Rivkin Radler LLP

New York Insurance Coverage Law Update

Rivkin Radler LLP on

SUM Endorsement In Commercial Automobile Policy Issued To LLC Deemed To Cover Its Sole Member As “Insured” Alan Tekel was struck by a vehicle.  After Tekel settled with the driver of the vehicle for the full limit of the...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit: Statutory Disclaimer Results in No Case or Controversy

The Federal Circuit ruled that statutory disclaimer terminates the case or controversy between the parties in an infringement suit as to those claims, and immediately deprives the district court of the authority to take...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Webinar Recap! Hot Topics and Trends in California Consumer Class Actions

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

On Wednesday, August 7, 2019, Seyfarth partners Robert Milligan and Joseph Escarez reviewed the latest consumer class action law developments affecting companies that do business in California. It is no secret that...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - May 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Priority Claims Cannot Be Incorporated by Reference - In Vanda Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. West-Ward Pharmaceuticals International Limited, Appeal Nos. 2016-2707 and 2016-2708, the Federal Circuit held that when a patent for a...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

Core Wireless v. LG affirms the denial of summary judgment as to unpatentable subject matter, ruling that the asserted claims are directed to an improved user interface for computing devices, not to the abstract idea of an...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | April 2017

Knobbe Martens on

Patentee’s Unnecessarily Broad Prosecution Disclaimer Affirmed by Federal Circuit - In Technology Properties Limited LLC v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Appeal Nos. 2016-1306, -1307, -1309, -1310, -1311, the Federal...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Avid Technology, Inc. v. Harmonic, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016) - Lesson for Defendant-Appellee's: Provide Responsive Arguments on Appeal

On January 29, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued an Opinion in Avid Technology, Inc. v. Harmonic, Inc. in which the judgment of the District Court was vacated, and the case was remanded for a new trial on infringement. Avid...more

Melito & Adolfsen

NY Court of Appeals wrestles with whether insurer that responds to tendering insurer instead of to purported additional insured...

Melito & Adolfsen on

On 10/22/14, the Court of Appeals heard argument in Sierra v. 4401 Sunset Park. The Court had granted Scottsdale leave to appeal from the Second Department’s ruling that Scottsdale’s disclaimer to GNY, which had tendered an...more

21 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