Just Press "Play"
Podcast - “I Lied Like a Dog!”
Podcast - "Ready for Trial?"
Podcast - Every Case Is a New World
The 3 Core Themes of Trial Law: Tell Your Story
Podcast - Getting Dressed for Court
Podcast - The Witness Outline
Cross-Examination: The Three C’s of Impeachment
Cross-Examination: How to Effectively Impeach with a Prior Inconsistent Statement
Podcast - Cross-Examination: Don't Argue - Elicit Facts
Podcast - Direct Examination: Getting Rid of Clutter
The Basics of Opening Statements
Exuding Credibility in the Courtroom
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 233: Listen and Learn -- Impeachment (Part 2)
The Strategic Advantages of Working with Jury Consultants – IMS Insights Podcast Episode 56
Witness Testimony Themes, Cross Examination, & Preparation Consultants – IMS Insights Podcast Episode 55
Witness Prep Goals, Credibility Factors, & Juror Comprehension – IMS Insights Podcast Episode 54
Podcast - Finding the Balance
Podcast - A Tortured Journey with the Lying Witness
Podcast - The Extreme Case
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding of noninfringement, concluding that the patent owner had improperly raised a claim construction issue for the first time on appeal – an...more
Drafting the expert declaration is another critical task for Patent Owners during the inter partes review (“IPR”) discovery period. As noted in our previous post, IPR expert witnesses provide declarations as affirmative...more
As discussed in our previous post, one of the most critical tasks for Patent Owners during the Inter Partes Reviews (“IPR”) discovery period is deposing the Petitioner’s expert. Since IPR depositions are treated differently...more
While those interested in the outcome await the April 9th filing of motions authorized by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in Interference Nos. 106,126 (between Senior Party Toolgen...more
At the end of October, in Interference No. 106,115 between Senior Party The Broad Institute, Harvard University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (collectively, "Broad") and Junior Party the University of...more
While PTAB proceedings are ordinarily decided “on the papers,” in certain rare cases the Board will permit live witness testimony at the oral hearing. The Board’s precedential decision in K-40 v. Escort explains that...more
Addressing the scope of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) guidelines that prohibit lawyers from conferring with their witness during cross-examination, the PTAB designated as precedential a 2014 decision permitting lawyers...more
On July 10, 2019, the PTAB’s Precedential Opinion Panel designated Focal Therapeutics, Inc. v. Senorx, Inc., IPR2014-00116, Paper 19 (PTAB July 21, 2014), as precedential. By way of background, during PTAB proceedings, direct...more
Last week the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) designated as precedential a decision from 2014, which found that counsel can confer with a deponent at the conclusion of cross examination and prior to redirect. Through...more
On July 10, 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board designated as precedential Focal Therapeutics, Inc. v. Senorx, Inc., IPR2014-00116, Paper 19 (PTAB, July 21, 2014), which concerned the rules governing depositions in the...more
In a recent decision that the PTAB designated as precedential, the Board denied a patent owner’s request to provide live testimony from the inventor of the challenged patent at the oral hearing. In DePuy Synthes Products,...more
Generally, the PTAB does not allow live testimony at oral argument, but recently it designated one of its 2014 decisions as precedential to give guidance as to when the Board will allow live testimony at oral argument. K-40...more