Predispute waivers of jury trials are unenforceable under California law, subject to certain limited exceptions. While the recent California Supreme Court case of Grafton Partners v. Supreme Court, invalidated such waivers, there remain two ways that parties can agree, predispute, to avoid a jury trial in commercial real property related transactions.
Armed with a well-stocked patent portfolio, a company can effectively corner valuable markets for a limited amount of time. While this concept is second nature for most makers of tangible products, pharmaceuticals, or even software, it is only now becoming widely accepted in the financial services sector. As a result, another battlefield is emerging in which patents are becoming the weapon of choice, and trading floors and back-office processing centers have become the new settings for patent disputes.
'We hold that petitioner was not required, insofar as Article III is concerned, to break or terminate its 1997 license agreement before seeking a declaratory judgment in federal court that the underlying patent is invalid, unenforceable, or not infringed.'With this language, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded its 8-1 landmark decision in MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., reversing the holding of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ('Federal Circuit'). This decision has potentially wide-ranging ramifications for patent licensing.
The U.S. Supreme Court has recently shown an interest in intellectual property in general and patents in particular. Most prominent among the recent cases is KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., which presents perhaps the most difficult question in substantive patent law: When is the subject of a patent application a true 'invention' ' that is, something that promotes the progress of a useful art sufficient to warrant giving the applicant exclusive rights to the technology claimed for the next 20 years. Conversely, when is the invention 'obvious' ' merely taking a step that anyone of ordinary skill would take, confronted with the same problem and possessing all the knowledge already known to the field?
Highlights of the latest franchising news from around the country.
Highlights of the latest franchising cases from around the country.
California caught the attention of international franchisors and franchisees who have arbitration clauses in their franchise agreements in the recently filed opinion in Gueyffier v. Ann Summers, Ltd. ___ Cal.App.4th ___, 2006 WL ___ (2d Dist. Oct. 26, 2006). The decision held that an arbitrator exceeded his authority when he ignored provisions in a franchise agreement that limited the circumstances under which he was permitted to find the franchisor in breach.
A complete list of the cases included in this issue.
It all started when communications director Peter Columbus left O'Melveny & Myers for a position at Kaye Scholer this fall. To fill the opening at O'Melveny, John Buchanan left his job at Heller Ehrman. To fill that slot at Heller, Patrick Bustamante left his post at DLA Piper. 'Clearly there's a domino effect,' Buchanan said.
First came business card exchanges, then networking events, then law firms became more organized and developed marketing databases to keep track of all clients, potential clients, referral sources and mailing lists. Then along came Client Relationship Management systems otherwise known as CRM. Now we have ERM (enterprise relationship management), RCM (relationship capital management) and more acronyms than you can shake a stick at. No matter what the new technology, the bottom line persists: Lawyers need to maintain and grow their world of relationships in order to be successful and generate revenue.
