This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from North Carolina on Monday over the constitutionality of a state law allowing employers to sue employees working as undercover investigators. The challenged statute, N.C. The court stated that the law substantially “burden[ed] newsgathering and publishing activities.”
The Supreme Court of India ruled Thursday that any acquisition of private property by the state must meet a set of criteria under Article 300A of India’s Constitution, which includes being carried out for a public purpose, following the law, and following proper procedure. This incident prompted Shah to petition the Calcutta High Court.
Choosing between the two competing readings, “one limited and one near limitless,” the Supreme Court on Thursday handily rejected the government’s “boundless” interpretation of the aggravated identity theft statute. The government also charged Dubin with aggravated identity theft, which carries a separate two-year sentence.
International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor Karim AA Khan announced on Thursday that his office filed two applications for arrest warrants before the Pre-trial Chamber against two Taliban officials accused of committing crimes against humanity.
The Republic of Croatia Wednesday filed a declaration of intervention in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) case of Ukraine v. Russian Federation under Article 63 of the ICJ Statute. Human rights experts worldwide have accused Russia of genocide since its invasion of Ukraine. It is part of a procedural matter.
The court found their declarations of intervention admissible under Article 63 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. The article allows states that are parties to the convention whose construction is in question to intervene in the proceedings.
United States broke no new ground, as it followed a steady line of cases applying a rule under which time limits in federal statutes do not create jurisdictional bars unless the statute makes that intent clear. Share Tuesday’s decision in Wilkins v. So, if the bar is jurisdictional, they would be completely out of luck.
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Friday filed a declaration of intervention in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the case of Ukraine v. According to the ICJ, under Article 63 of the Statute of the Court , states may intervene in proceedings if the outcome will bind them. Russian Federation.
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Tuesday ruled that a Honduran man’s conviction in California for possession of a forged social security number card (SSN) with a counterfeit government seal is grounds for deportation as a crime of moral turpitude.
Rain and Samsung agree that this case comes down to claim construction. And, as typical, the patentee is attempting to thread the needle with a construction that is broad enough to be infringed, but narrow and specific enough to avoid invalidation. The district court construed one term narrowly — resulting in no infringement.
The case involves a technical problem about pleading standards under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, and the courts resolution of the problem was, in a word, technical. She acknowledges that concerns about such a low threshold are serious, but she suggests three tools courts should use to mitigate them.
Share The Supreme Court on Monday heard oral argument in Patel v. Garland , an immigration case that raises a question about federal court review for noncitizens who were denied certain types of discretionary relief. First, the applicant must meet precise eligibility requirements under the statute. a green card).
In 2003, Malaysia and Singapore agreed to the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) jurisdiction to determine whether Malaysia or Singapore enjoys sovereignty over three groups of islets in the South China Sea, namely Pedra Branca, Middle Rocks and South Ledge.
On Monday, the court will hear argument in a pair of cases, Pugin v. The Supreme Court has held that the federal crime of obstruction of justice requires “interference with a pending or ongoing proceeding to administer justice.” He then received a notice to appear in immigration court for removal proceedings. But the U.S.
Even though the PTE provisions established in the Drug Price Competition and Patent Restoration Act are forty-plus years old, courts are still grappling with questions about how to best implement the Patent Term Extension. the Court looked at the term the patent in the PTE statute at 35 U.S.C. In Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
The Tennessee Supreme Court recently explained the analysis for whether a statute creates a private right of action. In Affordable Construction Services, Inc. Plaintiff general contractor brought this action in chancery court, asserting that it had a private right of action pursuant to a Tennessee statute.
Share In its first opinion of the 2022-23 term, the Supreme Court unanimously held on Monday that a one-year timeframe for military veterans to apply for retroactive disability benefits is a firm deadline that cannot be extended under a doctrine known as “equitable tolling.” The problem for Arellano was that a federal statute, 38 U.S.C.
The US Supreme Court heard arguments Monday on whether Indian Health Services (IHS) should be reimbursed for “contract support costs” associated with third parties, such as Medicare and Medicaid. The Supreme Court heard this issue because of the split among the circuit courts.
Share Under a historic water crisis in the desert southwest, the Navajo Nation asked for a court order requiring the federal government to determine the Nation’s water needs and to devise a plan to meet those needs. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. The decision came down to how the court framed the Nation’s claims.
Where defendant governmental entity did not own the park where plaintiff was injured, and plaintiff was attending a concert in the park when she fell, summary judgment based on both the GTLA and Recreational Use Statute was affirmed. The trial court agreed, granting the motion, and summary judgment was affirmed on appeal. In Costner v.
United States felt like a legislation class in law school, with various canons of statutory construction being bandied about. Dubin concerns the reach of the federal aggravated identity theft statute and whether a person must steal another’s identity to commit the crime. Share In many ways, Monday’s oral argument in Dubin v.
Ireland Tuesday filed a declaration of intervention in the Registry of the Court in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the case of Ukraine v. Under Article 63 of the Statute of the Court , states may intervene in the proceedings if the outcome will bind them. Russian Federation.
Share The Petitions of the Week column highlights a selection of cert petitions recently filed in the Supreme Court. De George , the Supreme Court held that the term “crime involving moral turpitude” in federal immigration law is not unconstitutionally vague. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit upheld Daye’s deportation order.
The appellate decision altered claim construction and told the PTAB to try its analysis again with the new construction. Not Literally Disclosed : On remand, the patent challenger TCT successfully shifted its argument based upon the Federal Circuit’s new claim construction. I call this the not-literally-disclosed ground.
Tax Court of an IRS notice of determination. The case turns on Section 6330(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code, which states that a “person may, within 30 days of a determination under this section, petition the Tax Court for review of such determination (and the Tax Court shall have jurisdiction with respect to such matter).”.
It is a well-known fact that there are two different sources of employment law: common law and statutes. While lay-off under Employment Standards Act, in general, is allowed, under the common law the same lay-off is treated as a breach of the employment contract and a constructive dismissal. In Coutinho v. Ocular Health Centre Ltd.,
Where premises liability plaintiffs could not show that defendant church, who was renting the property to another church, had constructive notice of a downed power line on the property that had most likely been down for approximately 26 hours, summary judgment was affirmed. The Court of Appeals, however, disagreed. In Kelly v.
That may change after the Supreme Court hears Arellano v. Arellano appealed, requesting that the timetable in the controlling statute, 38 U.S.C. Equitable tolling allows courts, or in this case, an agency, to excuse missed deadlines in some circumstances. McDonough , which will be argued on Tuesday.
by Dennis Crouch In a case highlighting the ongoing challenge of claim construction in software patents, the Federal Circuit has affirmed the district court’s determination that Fintiv’s asserted claims are invalid as indefinite. The Statutes at Issues: 35 U.S.C. Fintiv, Inc. PayPal Holdings, Inc. , 2023-2312 (Fed.
Nugent), the District Court denied defendant’s motion for attorney fees under 35 U.S.C. § As way of background, in patent infringement cases, Courts are authorized to award “reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party” in “exceptional cases.” Motorola Solutions, Inc. ,
Last week, the New York State Supreme Court for New York County dismissed Glen Oaks Village Owners v. The court holds that the CLCPA does not preempt Local Law 97. The Glen Oaks plaintiffs, according to the court, “failed to address” the second part of the two-part test.
Natural Resources Defense Council , determines when a federal court must defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statute it administers. First, under step one, if the court determines Congress’ intent is clear and unambiguous in the statute, the court will interpret the statute according to its terms, without deferring to the agency.
The Supreme Court has not yet granted writ of certiorari in any patent cases this term. Still, there are a number of important patent cases pending before the court. Still, there are a number of important patent cases pending before the court. by Dennis Crouch. Lets talk them through. Qualcomm Incorporated , No. 35 U.S.C. §
The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) said Monday he was seeking approval to resume his investigation of war crimes in Afghanistan. ” Khan praised the former government’s “constructive engagement” with his office prior to August 15, the date on which the Taliban seized control of Kabul.
Garland raises an important question about whether a federal court can review a decision by an agency within the Department of Justice that a noncitizen is ineligible for a green card. The Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the case on Monday. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. Share Patel v.
Where plaintiff tripped on an uneven sidewalk and brought a GTLA premises liability suit against defendant city, plaintiff could not show constructive notice because she could not show how long the condition had existed. The statute at the core of the appeal was Tenn. In Mitchell v. City of Franklin, Tennessee , No. Code Ann. §
19, 2023) WDTX District Court Judge Alan Albright sided with the accused infringer in this case — holding that the asserted claims were invalid as indefinite. In MPF analysys, the court looks beyond the magic words and more generally ask whether the limitation recites a non-structural “nonce” word. Google LLC , Nos.
In Charles Dickens’ Oliver Twist , a court informs the irascible character of Mr. Bumble that it assumes a level of control of his wife’s conduct. The scene came to mind with a decision yesterday when the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted 4-3 in Sojenhomer v. Village of Egg Harbor that a sidewalk is not a “pedestrian way.”
Supreme Court struck down the Chevron doctrine in its recent decision in Relentless v. Facts of the Case The Supreme Court granted certiorari in the two cases to address whether Chevron U.S.A. Under Chevron’s two-step analysis, a reviewing court must first assess “whether Congress has directly spoken to the precise question at issue.”
The Supreme Court today observes Veterans Day. So, it’s an appropriate time to remember that Justice Goodwin Liu issued a 2021 separate statement exposing a gap in a veteran-specific sentencing statute and that the Legislature responded with corrective legislation. When the court denied a petition review in People v.
Becerra , the Supreme Court appeared receptive to the claim that Medicare overstepped its authority when it cut the amount that it paid certain hospitals for drugs they dispensed in their outpatient departments. Justice Neil Gorsuch followed up by asking Verrilli what should replace Chevron if the court abandoned the doctrine.
Internal Revenue Service , a unanimous court confirmed that the IRS can issue such a summons without notice to the account holder. The plain language of the statute, the court found, does not require that the delinquent taxpayer have a legal interest in the records summoned by the IRS. The district court, and later the U.S.
The court also addressed the burden of proof in estoppel cases, with the Federal Circuit holding that it lies with the party seeking the estoppel — a ruling that aligns with traditional practice and the best reading of the statute. Supreme Court in Apple v.
using the data model to construct a client application also with the user interface paradigm. ” During claim construction, Microsoft had asked for the term to be construed as meaning “no human labor required.” Microsoft’s counsel then asked, “Can we resolve the claim construction issue?”
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content