Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

What's Your Practice Worth?

Edward D. Heben

Law firms, because of caseload analysis and the project-oriented nature of their work, are notoriously hard to value, even more so than accounting firms and other professional service industries where there is an established schedule of work for at least a 12-month period.

Features

Are You Thinking About China?

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

If you have been thinking about entering the China market to diversify your revenue stream, here are some legal issues to consider.

Features

New 'Dualing' Amendments to Dealer-Protection Laws Pass Legislatures

Rick J. Gibson, Jeffrey J. Jones, J. Todd Kennard & Douglas M. Mansfield

Many auto dealer contracts prohibit "dualing," that is, operating competing linemakes out of the same facility. Under new legislation passed in some states, automobile manufacturers could be forced to allow dualing, notwithstanding any terms to the contrary in written agreements and trademark laws.

Features

News Briefs

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Highlights of the latest franchising news from around the country.

Court Watch

Darryl A. Hart & Charles G. Miller

Highlights of the latest franchising cases from around the country.

Employee Free Choice Act Slowed, But Not Dead

Kevin Adler

Although passage of the federal Employee Free Choice Act ("EFCA") has taken a distant back seat to health care reform, the proposed changes to workplace unionization and collective bargaining rules have significant potential impacts for business owners.

Features

Movers & Shakers

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Who's doing what; who's going where.

Mapping the Technical Terrain

H. Jackson Knight

In the filing of a patent application, the patent agent or attorney is like the commanding officer conducting the battle. This "General" has specialized techniques for drafting and prosecuting patent applications and attempts to get the best patents issued for the client.

Federal Circuit Decision Provides Guidance for Joint Licensing of Pooled Patents

Donald W. Hawthorne

Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in a long-running patent misuse litigation of potential significance for any patent owner participating in a patent pool or considering participation in a patent pool.

Features

The Peer Review Pilot Program at the USPTO

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

The USPTO established the Peer Review Pilot Program (the "Pilot") to test whether "the organized collection and submission of documents together with comments by the public will produce better examination results by presenting prior art known by the public to the Examiner early in the prosecution." The USPTO is expected to publish a comprehensive report outlining the results and next steps.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Surveys in Patent Infringement Litigation: The Next Frontier
    Most 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 ›
  • In the Spotlight
    On 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 &amp; 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 ›