Features
David Lee Tayman
Setting aside the contentious issue of whether stimulus activities are good for the economy at large, it is important that applicants for, and recipients of, stimulus funds realize that participation in these programs could result not only in significant benefits, but also in exposure to legal liability.
Features
Robert S. Reder
&
Matthew A. Thiel
The <i>Axcelis</i> decision demonstrates the continued reluctance of Delaware courts to allow plaintiffs to utilize DGCL ' 220 as a means to troll for lawsuits against corporations.
Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
National rulings of importance.
Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.
Features
Stanley M. Brand
A recent indictment of a former Member of Congress has rekindled the legal debate over the scope and effect of the Speech or Debate clause and perhaps presages a return to the Supreme Court for a ruling to settle the conflict among the circuit courts about interpretation of the Clause.
Features
Stanley A. Twardy, Jr.
&
Doreen Klein
On Oct. 16, 2009, federal agents arrested Raj Rajaratnam, the founder of hedge fund Galleon Group, in an alleged insider trading scheme that involved well known public companies and thus far 20 defendants, including lawyers, stock traders, management consultants, and executives inside the issuers themselves. Wiretapping was part of the case.
Features
Michael L. Cook
Lenders, financial advisers, accountants, indenture trustees and other professionals who bargain for reimbursement of their legal fees should be reassured by <i>Ogle v. Fid. & Deposit Co. of Md.</i> Here's why.
Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
As the prognostications of potential outcomes for this case continue over the next several months, it may be wise to recognize that regardless of the outcome, there will always be some degree of uncertainty regarding the limits of patent eligibility. Consequently, the best corporate patent strategies should address and accommodate those uncertainties. While this article describes some of those possible strategies and perspectives, it is far from exhaustive and obviously does not necessarily represent the opinions of its author, his firm, or its clients.
Features
Michael K. Milani
&
Eric Carnick
On Sept. 11, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Court issued an opinion in the case of <i>Lucent Technologies Inc. et al. v. Gateway Inc. et al.</i> In its ruling, the CAFC found that "the damages evidence of record was neither very powerful, nor presented very well by either party" and that the plaintiff's damages calculation "lacked sufficient evidentiary support." The CAFC therefore vacated the district court's award and remanded the case for a new trial on damages.
Features
Julia S. Kim
On Nov. 9, 2009, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in <i>In re Bilski</i> ' a case that will likely impact whether business methods are eligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C. ' 101. To date, the Supreme Court has held that abstract ideas, natural phenomena, and laws of nature are not patent eligible, but has yet to apply that holding to a business method.
