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 74

Circuit Court Rejects Attack On NLRB’s New Witness Rule
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • June 7 2017

During the last several years, the NLRB has overturned a great deal of existing precedent. Among other changes, the Board has required bargaining over


The Federal Circuit’s Standing Requirement to Appeal Patent Office Decisions
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • January 24 2017

In a recent landmark decision, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit announced that not all inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings at the U.S


Fifth Circuit Joins Sister Circuits in Holding That Employees May Recover Emotional Distress Damages in FLSA Retaliation Suits
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • December 21 2016

On December 19, 2016, the Fifth Circuit joined the Sixth and Seventh Circuits in holding that “employees” under the FLSA may recover emotional


German DPA Plans to Challenge Privacy Shield
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • European Union, Germany
  • August 16 2016

The Privacy Shield is now live, having gone into effect on August 1. Perhaps emboldened by the Article 29 Working Party's late July announcement that


Supreme Court: Class Action Plaintiffs Must Show ‘Concrete’ Harm to Satisfy Article III
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 19 2016

In a 6-2 decision, the Supreme Court, in an opinion authored by Justice Alito, held that the Ninth Circuit’s Article III standing analysis in Robins


The Supreme Court’s Spokeo Decision and its Potential Impact on Privacy and Data Security Class Actions
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 17 2016

On May 16, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, ruling that a plaintiff must sufficiently allege an injury that is both concrete


Policy Fights in the Courts: United States v. Texas
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 2 2016

On April 18, 2016, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in a major immigration suit, United States v. Texas. This case is a highly-politicized


Fourth Circuit Extends Section 43(a) Lanham Act Standing to Companies Not Selling Their Product or Using Their Mark in the U.S.
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • March 31 2016

Last week, an appellate court held that a plaintiff has standing to bring a false association and false advertising claim under Section 43(a) of the


A yarn spun, but advertising not tailored to a Lanham Act claim
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • October 21 2015

In a recent application of the Supreme Court's 2014 Lexmark decision on standing, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held last month that a


A court in the Sunshine State blocks injunctive relief against Neutrogena sunscreen claims; meanwhile P&G cannot flush Charmin claims for the same relief in New York
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 7 2015

Assume the following: plaintiff brings a putative class action under state consumer protection laws alleging that he bought a product based on false