John C. Deane
In equipment leasing industry court cases, one of the challenges lawyers and judges face is simply understanding the nuances and contractual language of the business. That makes credible expert testimony in such legal matters especially critical to winning a case, whether it involves a bank, captive finance company, or independent leasing firm.
Features
Lewis J. Cohn
In a recent decision, <i>Cummings Properties, Inc. v. Aspeon Solutions, Inc., et al.</i> (Lawyers Weekly No. 13-019-07), the Massachusetts District Court/Boston Municipal Court Appellate Division affirmed the District Court judge's findings at trial that a defendant could not be held personally liable on a guaranty contained in a commercial real estate lease that the defendant quickly signed in two places before rushing off to the airport to make a flight. This decision was affirmed by the appellate division based on the defense of fraud in the factum.
Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
Information about the advancement of lawyers in the patent profession.
H. Jackson Knight
Engineers, scientists, and other technical professionals 'make or break' the development of IP strategy in industry. It is not uncommon to develop IP strategy by drawing in a number of technical experts to work with decision makers and an IP agent or attorney to develop a strategy that others will implement. For example, sometimes an IP strategy for a new invention or new technology is to be developed, or the business wishes to develop an IP strategy to support the growth of new products. In such instances, it is helpful to consider how to select the technical experts to assist this strategic effort.
Features
Robert Buergi
The recent Federal Circuit decision <i>McKesson Info. Solutions, Inc. v. Bridge Med., Inc.</i>, No. 2006-1517 (Fed. Cir. May 18, 2007) has many patent prosecutors scrambling to file information disclosures after the court found inequitable conduct based on the all-too-common oversight of not cross-citing prior art from similar, co-pending applications and the even more common oversight of not cross-citing allowances and rejections from such applications.
John H. Hornickel
Every U.S. Supreme Court decision affecting intellectual property involves intellectual property attorneys from that moment forward, and all of the pending patent applications that those attorneys are prosecuting. How those attorneys react to the pronouncement of law makes the difference.
Andrew Carter, Suzue Fujimori
&
Mark Rollins
Part One of this series examined several significant changes to both Japanese and U.S. IP-related laws and regulations that have helped empower Japanese firms to effectively utilize IP. This second installment discusses corporate strategies Japanese firms are starting to employ to capitalize on their intellectual capital.
Jane DiRenzo Pigott
Affinity groups are groups that are sponsored and supported by an organization and consist of people with a common set of characteristics. Common affinity groups in larger law firms include ones involving women attorneys; attorneys of color; reduced- schedule attorneys; and people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender ('GLBT'). Affinity groups are effective tools that organizations have used successfully to improve retention and promotion, and to enhance recruiting efforts. Affinity groups that 'support the attorneys and provide outlets and channels of communication with senior management' are also considered diversity best practices (The Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Statement of Diversity Principles, Diversity Practices).
Features
ALM Staff
&
Law Journal Newsletters
Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.
Features
Marcy L. Wachtel
&
Suzanne L. Stolz
In the past few years, more requests for modification of a child support obligations, either upward or downward, have been denied than granted. With regard to the cases in which an upward modification was denied, the courts have been reluctant to find that the party seeking to modify the child support obligation has established that any claimed change in circumstances was unanticipated or that the children's needs were not being met.
