Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A district court has broad discretion to manage its docket and decide venue transfer motions. The ongoing proceedings in Netlist, Inc. v. SK Hynix Inc., Nos. 6:20-CV-00194-ADA, 6:20-cv-00525-ADA (W.D. Tex.) provide an unusual and informative example of the scope and bounds of that discretion.
On March 17, 2020, Plaintiff Netlist filed a first action in the Western District of Texas alleging that Defendant SK Hynix infringes two related patents. A few months later, on June 15, 2020, it filed a second action in the same court alleging infringement of a third, unrelated patent. District Court Judge Alan Albright consolidated the cases, setting a Markman hearing for March 19, 2021 and trial for Dec. 6, 2021. See, e.g., -194 case, Dkt. No. 73 at 3, 5.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.