Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 334: Listen and Learn -- Standards of Review (Con Law)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 160: Listen and Learn -- Standards of Review (Con Law)
Award Protests: Choosing the Forum
If I won my case, why do I need to worry about an appeal?
The trial is over. The jury has spoken – or the judge has ruled – and the outcome wasn’t what you hoped. Now what? At that moment, many litigants turn to the idea of an appeal as a second chance, a do-over. It’s important...more
On 10 March 2020 the Court of Appeal upheld the Competition Appeal Tribunal's (CAT) quashing of the Competition and Markets Authority's (CMA) decision that Pfizer and Flynn Pharma (Flynn) had abused their dominant positions...more
In a recent precedential decision, TQ Delta, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed a pair of USPTO inter partes review proceedings that invalidated all claims of two related U.S. patents because “the...more
The new year brings us some clarification regarding due process and sufficiency of the evidence necessary to support a subcontractor substitution on a California public works project. The case of note is JMS Air Conditioning...more
The Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s inter partes review decision declaring various claims of patent owner Thales’ U.S. Patent No. 6,474,159 (“the ‘159 patent”) nonobvious. In doing so, the Federal...more
In McElhaney v. City of Moab, 2017 UT 65, —- P.3d —-, the Utah Supreme Court held that an adjudicative land use decision, and likely all administrative decisions subject to substantial evidence review on appeal, must include...more
In Stanford University v. The Chinese University of Hong Kong (Fed Cir. No 2015-2011, June 27, 2017), the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded interference decisions on the ground the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”)...more
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court confirmed that federal appeals courts should apply a deferential standard of review to federal district court determinations regarding the legal sufficiency of EEOC subpoenas....more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision on April 3, 2017, in McLane Co., Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a case which presented the question of what the appropriate standard of appellate...more
In a 7 to 1 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that courts of appeals should largely defer to lower courts’ decisions when policing subpoenas issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). By...more
One of the most important components of the employment relationship is the benefits package an employer is able to offer its employees. Employee benefits have to make business sense for the employer because there’s always a...more
Be careful what you ask for. The Plaintiff in a recent case from the Central District of California learned that lesson when the Plan’s re-evaluation of her claim for benefits revealed that she was apparently working as a...more
On January 20, 2015, the Supreme Court provided guidance on the standard of review for claim construction on appeal in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 12-854. The Court held “[w]hen reviewing a district...more
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently held in Bowling v. Office of Open Records, No. 20 MAP 2011, 2013 WL 4436219, at *1 (Pa. Aug. 20, 2013), that courts reviewing pending cases under the state’s Right-to-Know Law (“RTKL”)...more