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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 1,532

Female Attorneys’ Settlement of Equal Pay Dispute with Farmers Insurance Provides Little Guidance for California Employers
  • Newmeyer & Dillion LLP
  • USA
  • May 24 2017

California's Equal Pay Act (the "Act"), Cal. Lab. Code section 1197.5, is widely recognized as one of the most aggressive and pro-employee wage


Supreme Court’s TC Heartland Decision Will Move Venue Out of E.D. Texas
  • Ropes & Gray LLP
  • USA
  • May 23 2017

On May 22, 2017, in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, the Supreme Court unanimously overturned nearly thirty years of Federal Circuit


TC Heartland LLC VS. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC: The Supreme Court Continues To Take Aim At Patent Trolls
  • Harter Secrest & Emery LLP
  • USA
  • May 23 2017

Patent assertion entities (PAEs), frequently labeled "patent trolls," often purchase patents of questionable validity and bring costly infringement


US Supreme Court limits scope of venue for patent infringement litigation
  • Dentons
  • USA
  • May 23 2017

In TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, No. 16-341, 2017 WL 2216934 (May 22, 2017), the United States Supreme Court narrowed the choice


U.S. Supreme Court Limits Venue Under the Patent Statute in TC Heartland
  • Paul Hastings LLP
  • USA
  • May 23 2017

On May 22, 2017, the United States Supreme Court, in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, put an end to the swirling legal debate


Caveat Emptor in the Information Age?
  • McGuireWoods LLP
  • USA
  • May 23 2017

Commercial litigator Brooks Gresham and products liability litigator Trent Taylor bring us some timely thoughts about reliance from a recent decision


Federal Circuit Extends Prosecution Disclaimer to IPR Proceedings
  • Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP
  • USA
  • May 18 2017

On May 11, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed an issue of first impression: whether statements made by a patent owner during


Employer’s Enforcement of Its Call-In Policy Was Reasonable Vis-à-Vis a Disabled Employee
  • Jackson Lewis PC
  • USA
  • May 17 2017

Employers frequently struggle with enforcement of call-in and job abandonment policies when there has been a lack of communication by a disabled


Be Careful What You Wish For: Federal Circuit Says Statements Made During IPR Can Limit Scope of Patent
  • K&L Gates
  • USA
  • May 17 2017

The Federal Circuit on May 11, 2017, addressing the question for the first time, held that statements made by a patent owner during inter partes


Northern District Of California Dismisses Putative Securities Class Action; Finds Company’s Statements To Be Puffery And Non-Actionable Forward Looking Statements
  • Shearman & Sterling LLP
  • USA
  • May 16 2017

On May 1, 2017, Judge Jon Tigar of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed a putative securities fraud