Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Permanent Injunctions in Patent Cases: Generating Evidentiary Support
The Supreme Court recently changed the longstanding rules for obtaining a permanent injunction in patent infringement cases. eBay Inc. v. MercExchange LLC, 126 S.Ct. 1837 (2006). Prior to the Supreme Court's ruling in eBay, it was generally accepted that a successful plaintiff in a patent infringement trial was entitled to a permanent injunction virtually automatically. The Federal Circuit's rule was 'courts will issue permanent injunctions against patent infringement absent exceptional circumstances.' The few exceptions to this rule were generally limited to situations where public health would be affected by enjoining the infringer.
In the eBay decision, the Supreme Court rejected the Federal Circuit's general rule that permanent injunctions will issue automatically. Now, a successful plaintiff must satisfy the traditional four-factor test before a permanent injunction will be entered. The four factors that the plaintiff must satisfy are:
- That it has suffered an irreparable injury;
- That remedies available at law, such as monetary damages, are inadequate to compensate for that injury;
- That, considering the balance of hardships between the plaintiff and defendant, a remedy in equity is warranted; and
- That the public interest would not be disserved by a permanent injunction.
See eBay Inc. v. MercExchange LLC, 126 S.Ct. 1837.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Beach Boys Songs Written Decades Ago Triggered Current Quarrel With Lawyers
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
When Is a Repair Structural or Nonstructural Under a Commercial Lease?
A common question that commercial landlords and tenants face is which of them is responsible for a repair to the subject premises. These disputes often center on whether the repair is "structural" or "nonstructural."