DE Under 3: Reversal of 2019 Enterprise Rent-a-Car Trial Decision; EEOC Commissioner Nominee Update; Overtime Listening Session
The Dangers of Untimely Filings – What Employers Need to Know
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: A Discussion of Kisor v. Wilkie
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
E17: Carpenter Decision Builds Up Privacy from #SCOTUS
USPTO Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart recently vacated and remanded three Final Written Decisions from the PTAB. Semiconductor Components Indus. v. Greenthread, LLC, IPR2023-01242, IPR2023-01243, IPR2023-01244, Paper 94...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued the following two per curiam decisions: Pakdel v. City and County of San Francisco, No. 20-1212: Petitioners are partial owners of a multiunit residential building in...more
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued the following three decisions: Federal Republic of Germany v. Philipp, No. 19-351: In this Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”) case, the respondents - heirs of...more
At Federal Circuitry blog, we like to check in once in a while on what the Federal Circuit is doing in its orders that don’t get posted on the public website. Those orders often offer nuggets about practice at the Federal...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
On June 15, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer and White Sales, Inc. to decide a question that has divided the federal circuit courts and state supreme courts: “whether a provision...more
At the end of the Supreme Court’s most recent term, the Court released its long-awaited ruling in PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., 139 S. Ct. 2051 (June 20, 2019)—a case that could have carried...more
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) prohibits unsolicited calls, text messages and faxes; it’s a federal statute that provides for statutory damages between $500-$1,500 per violation. With the speed and ease (and...more
In its long-awaited ruling addressing whether the Administrative Orders Review Act (Hobbs Act) requires district courts to accept the FCC's legal interpretations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (the TCPA), the...more
On June 24, in Dex Media, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, LP, No. 18-916 (U.S.), the Supreme Court agreed to review the question whether 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) permits appeal of the PTAB’s decision to institute an inter...more
TCPA litigators have been closely monitoring the U.S. Supreme Court's docket waiting for a ruling in the PDR Network case. At stake is what kind of judicial deference should be given to the FCC's interpretation of the...more
In November 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court had granted certiorari in PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., to decide whether the Hobbs Act required the district court to accept the Federal Communications...more
Are district courts prohibited in every instance from considering challenges to the Federal Communication Commission (“FCC”)’s interpretation of certain provisions in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act – or can district...more
In a recent decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a federal district court was not necessarily bound by the Federal Communications Commission’s prior interpretation of a federal statute over which the agency has...more
Dodging the question of whether the Hobbs Act requires a federal court to accept the 2006 Federal Communication Commission (FCC) Order that provides the legal interpretation for the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA),...more
On June 20, 2019, the Supreme Court released its long-awaited decision in PDR v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic. The Court was expected to provide greater clarity about the extent to which litigants can challenge the Federal...more
On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court decided PDR Network, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., No. 17-1705, holding that whether the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) 2006 order interpreting the...more
It is a busy TCPA news day! The United States Supreme Court has released its decision in PDR Networks, LLC v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc., a TCPA junk fax class action. The decision is available for download...more
The Kentucky Court of Appeals just held that non-lawyers may no longer represent employers in unemployment proceedings, ruling that such a practice is unconstitutional. As a result, you must immediately adjust any business...more
In July 2018, our Construction Alert addressed the question of who decides the arbitrability of a dispute when your contract includes an arbitration clause. Is it a court or the arbitrator? How did the “wholly groundless”...more
Can arbitrators determine what issues they have the power to decide? According to the U.S. Supreme Court, they can, provided there is “clear and unmistakable evidence” the parties intended to delegate threshold questions to...more
Arbitration clauses are commonplace in corporate transactions, including those in the product liability arena. Whether the agreement concerns the distribution of a product to a seller or the sale of a product to a consumer,...more
In January 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision confirming the broad power of arbitrators and the strict enforcement of arbitration agreements. In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Kavanaugh, the Court in...more
Taking the time to include a well-crafted arbitration agreement in your employment contracts sometimes feels like a moot point, but a recent unanimous U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales,...more