Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
Recent rulings in neighboring states.
Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
Highlights of the latest franchising news.
Features
Elliott Scheinberg
<i>Simkin v. Blank</i>, a jarring Supreme Court decision, poses devastating consequences for divorcing couples who, unaware of Bernard Madoff's criminal enterprise, relied upon the accuracy of fraudulently generated portfolio statements.
Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
Features
Mark Hamblett
Two isolated genes closely associated with breast and ovarian cancer are unpatentable, a federal judge ruled in March. This article presents an analysis of the case.
Features
Jamie Moncus
There is, as yet, no consensus on whether defense counsel in medical malpractice proceedings have the right to interview plaintiffs' treating physicians through ex parte interviews to which plaintiffs and their counsel are not invited.
Features
Roberta Jacobs-Meadway
The recent decision of the Second Circuit in connection with the appeal in <i>Tiffany (NJ) Inc. and Tiffany & Company v. eBay, Inc.</i> represents a thorough and well-considered exploration of the basis for finding secondary liability in the electronic marketplace for those who facilitate the sale of infringing goods without ever selling the goods and, conversely, the way for the maker of the marketplace to avoid liability for infringements by those who sell on its site.
Features
Stacie B. Lieberman
Highlights of the latest insurance news from around the country.
Features
Larry A. Roberts
In Association for Molecular Pathology v. USPTO, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York invalidated patents related to isolated BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. The surprising aspect of the decision was the reason for invalidity ' the district court held that the isolated genes did not constitute patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. ' 101.
Features
Lori G. Cohen
&
Daniel I.A. Smulian
In pharmaceutical and medical device litigation, the failure-to-warn claim continues to be among the most common causes of action. This article examines some of the key factors involved in proving causation in a failure-to-warn case, and discusses recent case law in this area.
