Features
Decisions of Interest
Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.
Features
Drug & Device News
Recent developments in this all-important area.
Features
'Cyber Monday' a Big Hit Again
Cyber Monday, three days after Black Friday (the traditional start of the holiday shopping season for bricks-and-mortar retail outlets), was its usual hit with e-tailers in 2009 ' in fact, the largest yet in terms of sales. Comprehensive final sales figures weren't available by press time, but it appears that online shopping at the start of the holiday season was up at least 5% over 2008.
Features
FTC Guidelines Fallout
The regulations that the Federal Trade Commission recently promulgated on product endorsements could result in injunctions for bloggers and advertisers, who could be ordered to reimburse consumers for financial losses stemming from product reviews that are considered inappropriate under the new guidance.
Features
Certificate of Merit Laws Under Fire
In last month's issue we began a discussion of <i>Putman v. Wenatchee Valley Medical Center</i>, in which the Supreme Court of Washington struck down that state's law requiring the filing of a certificate of merit in medical malpractice lawsuits. Part Two herein concludes the discussion.
Medspa Operations
The medical spa industry has grown rapidly over the last several years. In 2004, there were only 471 in the United States, but by 2009 there were nearly 2,000. The law of averages suggests that with more spas, more treatments and more injuries, there are bound to be more mishaps and adverse reactions at these facilities.
Features
The Law of Unintended e-Consequences
Everyone who has ever worked on a tech project, whether in e-commerce or general business, has probably seen situations in which an assumed solution creates a bigger mess than the original problem. It's called <i>the law of unintended consequences.</i> A recent federal appellate ruling shows how this rule can work in the law.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar InvestigationsThis 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.Read More ›
- The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year LaterThe 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.Read More ›
- Surveys in Patent Infringement Litigation: The Next FrontierMost experienced intellectual property attorneys understand the significant role surveys play in trademark infringement and other Lanham Act cases, but relatively few are likely to have considered the use of such research in patent infringement matters. That could soon change in light of the recent admission of a survey into evidence in <i>Applera Corporation, et al. v. MJ Research, Inc., et al.</i>, No. 3:98cv1201 (D. Conn. Aug. 26, 2005). The survey evidence, which showed that 96% of the defendant's customers used its products to perform a patented process, was admitted as evidence in support of a claim of inducement to infringe. The court admitted the survey into evidence over various objections by the defendant, who had argued that the inducement claim could not be proven without the survey.Read More ›
- The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance ProgramsThe 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.Read More ›
- In the SpotlightOn May 9, 2003, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts announced that Bayer Corporation, the pharmaceutical manufacturer, had been sentenced and ordered to pay a criminal fine of $5,590,800 stemming from its earlier plea of guilty to violating the Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act by failing to list with the FDA its drug product, Cipro, that was privately labeled for an HMO. Such listing is required under the federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act. The Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act, Pub. L. 100-293, enacted on April 22, 1988, as modified on August 26, 1992 by the Prescription Drug Amendments (PDA) Pub. L. 102-353, 106 Stat. 941, amended sections 301, 303, 503, and 801 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, codified at 21 U.S.C. '' 331, 333, 353, 381, to establish requirements for distributing prescription drug samples.Read More ›
