The Future of Litigation: Adapting to the Era of Nuclear Verdicts
Podcast - Drowning in Complexity
Uncovering Juror Bias, Counteracting Nuclear Verdicts, & the Future of Massive Damages – IMS Insights Podcast Episode 47
Integrated Case Themes & Nuclear Verdict Causes – IMS Insights Podcast Episode 46
Law Brief®: Rich Schoenstein and Marie Pereira Discuss High-Profile Verdicts
Law Brief®: Rich Schoenstein Discusses Depp v. Heard Verdict
Law Brief®: Michael Grudberg, Robert Heim and Richard Schoenstein Discuss the Theranos Verdict
Leading in a Lonely World Podcast: Meet Dr. Jill Huntley Taylor
#WorkforceWednesday: Judge Barrett’s Employment Law Record, Arbitrator to Rule on Postmates’ Challenge, Responding to Frivolous Lawsuits - Employment Law This Week®
Verdict in T-Cell Immunotherapy IP Case Tests 'Reasonable Royalty' Concept for Large Damage Awards
Butler's Thursday Tips #5 | What is Appellate Law?
Episode 116 -- Alstom Executive Convicted of FCPA and Money Laundering Offenses
Jones Day Talks Intellectual Property: Blurrier Lines and Narrow Grounds—Implications of the Ninth Circuit’s Blurred Lines Decision
The Evolution of Trade Secret Damages
Federal Criminal Defense Attorney - Overturning A Guilty Verdict in a Federal Criminal Appeal
Mondis Tech. Ltd. v. LG Electronics Inc., Appeal Nos. 2023-2117, -2116 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 8, 2025) Our Case of the Week focuses on the written description requirement, and, in particular, how that requirement is considered...more
NexStep, Inc. v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, Nos. 2022-1815, -2005, -2113 (Fed. Cir. (D. Del.) Oct. 24, 2024). Opinion by Chen, joined by Taranto. Opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part by Reyna....more
Parkervision, Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-1755, 2024-2221 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 6, 2024) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit weighed in again on a 13-year-old patent dispute concerning Qualcomm’s...more
In VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation, No. 22-1906 (Fed. Cir. 2023), VLSI sued Intel for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,523,373 (the “’373 patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 7,725,759 (the “’759 patent”). After a jury...more
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of...more
Last week’s big news was of course the official swearing in of Judge Stark. But there were plenty of other things happening at the Court. Below we provide our usual weekly statistics and a detailed discussion of our case of...more
In January 2020, we wrote a Law360 guest article that highlighted some of the risks that followed Wells Fargo Bank NA's strategy in its patent dispute with the United Services Automobile Association over remote deposit check...more
A California jury recently ordered Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) and Broadcom, Ltd. (“Broadcom”) to pay the California Institute of Technology (“Caltech”) over $1.1 billion in damages for infringing several patents owned by Caltech....more
Recently, in Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. TCL Commc’n Tech. Holdings Ltd., the Delaware District Court awarded the prevailing plaintiff in a patent infringement suit an ongoing royalty that covers not only the products...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed denial of a licensee’s motion for a new trial, finding that there was no error in awarding damages to the plaintiff/licensor for the licensee’s failure to pay royalties...more
On February 15, a Texas federal jury found that Ericsson did not breach its obligation to offer HTC licenses to its standard-essential patents (SEPs) on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. The verdict ended...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Click-to-Call Technologies, LP v. Ingenio, Inc., Appeal No. 2015-1242 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 16, 2018) In an appeal of an inter partes review, the Federal Circuit reviewed for the first time the...more