Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 306: Spotlight on Civil Procedure (Part 3 – The Civil Lawsuit)
The Briefing: Diana Copeland – “Surviving R. Kelly” But Not Netflix’s Motion to Dismiss
(Podcast) The Briefing: Diana Copeland – “Surviving R. Kelly” But Not Netflix’s Motion to Dismiss
RICO's Person/Enterprise Distinction - RICO Report Podcast
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 286: Listen and Learn -- Conclusory Pleadings Under Rule 12(b)(6) (Civ Pro)
Navigating Civil Standing Requirements for Defense Success — RICO Report Podcast
Episode 322 -- Checking in on Caremark Cases
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 208: Listen and Learn -- Motions to Dismiss a Case
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - The Yonays Take the First Sortie in Copyright Fight With Paramount Over Top Gun Maverick
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: The Yonays Take the First Sortie in Copyright Fight With Paramount Over Top Gun Maverick
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Paramount is Ready to Dogfight in Top Gun Maverick Copyright Lawsuit
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Paramount is Ready to Dogfight in Top Gun Maverick Copyright Lawsuit
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Cookie Co’s Motion to Dismiss Trademark Lawsuit by Restaurant Crumbles
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Cookie Co’s Motion to Dismiss Trademark Lawsuit by Restaurant Crumbles
Second Circuit Decision Potentially Broadens RICO Proximate Cause Element - RICO Report Podcast
Anatomy of a Successful Motion to Dismiss in RICO Case
A Discussion on the Kollaritsch v. Michigan State University Board of Trustees Decision
I-16 – Kneeling, Indefinite Leave, DC Updates, Non-Compete Consideration, and Pretty as a Protected Class
Case Involving Burger King Employee Spitting in Officer’s Burger Goes Before WA Supreme Court
Decisions from June 27, 2025 - Ex parte GBC International Bank: This case involves whether a plaintiff established personal jurisdiction over a California company doing no business in Alabama. The plaintiff wired $60,000...more
On April 4, 2025, Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom (E.D.N.Y.) declined to sanction a pro se plaintiff for failing to conduct an adequate pre-suit investigation of whether his patent was infringed. Plaintiff initially filed a...more
Key Takeaway: Just as over a million businesses use Amazon web servers, many independent sellers also use Amazon warehouses to store their inventory. More than 60% of sales in the Amazon store come from independent sellers,...more
Following the Supreme Court’s TC Heartland decision in 2017, a patent owner may only sue an alleged infringer in either: (1) a judicial district of the state where the defendant is incorporated; or (2) a judicial district...more
The California Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s decision finding that a Texas court had personal jurisdiction over a California franchisee. GlobalCFO, LLC and GlobalCFO Franchise, LLC (collectively, “GlobalCFO”),...more
On August 19, 2024, the CFPB filed its reply brief in support of the CFPB’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce (Fort Worth Chamber) for lack of standing and, if granted, transfer the case to the...more
The Federal Circuit recently denied a mandamus petition seeking relief from a district court order denying a motion to dismiss a patent case for improper venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). Bel Power Solutions, Inc. sued...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s denial of motions made by two car distributors to transfer cases out of the Western District of Texas for improper venue, finding that the patent...more
Since the Supreme Court’s decision in TC Heartland (137 S. Ct. 1514 (2017)), the venue statute for patent cases, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), has been interpreted to mean that venue is proper only where the defendant “resides” or...more
The question of the proper court for a branded pharmaceutical maker to bring suit against an Abbreviated New Drug Application filer under the Hatch-Waxman Act is surprisingly unsettled seeing as the Act was enacted in 1984. ...more
The Federal Circuit wrapped up another (perhaps final) week of telephone arguments last week. As of now, the Court is still set to restart in-person arguments next month. But we’ll have to see if those plans change. Below we...more
Somewhat remarkably, there is no settled Federal Circuit precedent regarding where a patentee can bring suit against a generic competitor in Hatch-Waxman litigation under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2). While recognizing that this...more
Led by California, 23 states, including Massachusetts, have sued the Trump administration challenging new federal regulations that strip the states’ authority to set their own vehicle emissions standards. On December 3, 2019,...more
On September 30, 2019—more than two years after Plaintiff, Electric Mirror, LLC (“Electric Mirror”) first brought suit for patent infringement in the Southern District of New York—United States District Judge Andrew L. Carter...more
In Genentech, Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Co., 18-cv-1518 JLS (JLB) (S.D. Cal.), the California district court denied Lilly’s motion to dismiss for improper venue under the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). Opinion, Sept....more
WESTECH AEROSOL CORPORATION v. 3M COMPANY - Before Lourie, Mayer, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Summary: To establish proper venue, a plaintiff must...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit elected not to decide en banc whether servers or similar equipment in third-party facilities constitute a regular and established place of business under the patent venue...more
On February 5, 2019, in a per curiam order, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied Google’s petition for rehearing en banc, and deferred for another day the question of whether the presence of...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Prost, Newman, Lourie, Dyk, Moore, O’Malley, Reyna, Wallach, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, and Stoll. Dissenting opinion to denial of petition for rehearing written by Reyna and joined by Newman...more
By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in T-JAT Systems 2006 LTD. v. Expedia, Inc. (DE) et al., Civil Action No. 16-581-RGA (D.Del. January 29, 2019), the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion for...more
On January 2, 2019, District Judge Paul Oetken (S.D.N.Y.) transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ("CDCA") an action brought by Plaintiff NextEngine, Inc. against Defendants NextEngine,...more
ArcelorMittal Atlantique Et Lorraine v. AK Steel Corporation, Appeal No. 2017-1637 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 14, 2018) - In an opinion originally filed as sealed on Nov. 5 and unsealed on Nov. 18, the Federal Circuit vacated and...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Dyk, Reyna, and Taranto, per curiam. Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Summary: In a case pending before TC Heartland was...more
In our continuing post-TC Heartland coverage, Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas recently issued an interesting decision regarding the venue analysis for car companies selling into a particular...more
In May 2017, the Supreme Court tightened the rule for venue over domestic defendants in patent infringement cases finding that, under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), venue is proper only “in the judicial district where the defendant...more