We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 1,896

State revenue departments misapplying federal tax law

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 9 2014

State income tax laws generally build on federal tax law. The typical pattern is to begin the calculation of state taxable income with federal

New York ALJ rejects retroactive application of statute

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 8 2014

State courts generally have allowed legislatures a fair amount of flexibility in adopting retroactive statutes, but a recent New York case held that

Copying is not the ultimate test for copyright infringement

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 8 2014

Copying alone is insufficient to establish copyright infringement, according to the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. In an infringement

In case we didn’t know the difference between “big” and “little” cigars, the New York State Tax Department tells us what it is

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 5 2014

The New York State Department of Taxation and Finance has addressed one of the major issues in tax administration: defining the difference between

Patent owner cannot assert a claim that is missing a material limitation

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 8 2014

Addressing an attempt by a patent owner to assert a patent claim that was missing a material limitation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal

Expert testimony must be supported by evidence

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 27 2014

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued final written decisions in 10 Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenges. Although early IPR decisions

First application of Alice Corp. decision to covered business method patent review

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 8 2014

In determining whether a Covered Business Method (CBM) patent review should be instituted, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) referred to the

Inherency is tough to proveeven in IPR

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 8 2014

In four final written decisions in Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenges, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) concluded that the petitioner had

Rehearing of decision affirming PTO invalidity finding denied, even after upholding district court validity finding

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 29 2012

Addressing the merits of patent claims it had previously found to be valid, the U.S. ourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a request for an en banc rehearing of its decision affirming a finding (of invalidity) by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (Board

Federal Circuit sidesteps constitutionality of AIA first-to-file provision

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 8 2014

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit faced an issue of first impression when a named inventor on three patents challenged the