Client questions about litigation management are always the same: How likely are we to win? How long will it take? How much will it cost? The answers vary from case to case, but metrics exist to answer the questions and to enhance litigation management.
When technology changes the nature of what has been thought of as private, should the response be to continue to recognize that privacy, or to rethink what is private?
Since the active use of the term risk management, perhaps sometime in the 1980s, I have thought of the confluence of risk and management as an oxymoron.
The America Invents Act established inter partes review (IPR) proceedings at the USPTO. Under this new regime, any person other than the patent owner is able to challenge the validity of a patent with a patent office trial. In a growing number of cases, the validity of a patent is determined at the USPTO prior to a district court dispute on infringement. The cost and time benefits of an IPR has encouraged hundreds of Petitioners to partake in these new proceedings.
Consumers should be cautious when using bitcoin and alert the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to any problems with the virtual money, the agency said last month after a government watchdog this summer urged the CFPB to engage more on the currency.
With pandemic use of Facebook, Twitter and other online information-sharing tools creating heightened concerns over privacy, more couples are opting to put language into their prenuptial agreements restricting what their future spouse can reveal about them online.
Discussion of the ongoing battle for post-petition interest for over-secured creditors under section 506(b).
Many individuals desire to acquire insurance on their lives using funds held in a qualified retirement plan. The acquisition of insurance using funds within an IRA is beneficial since the Plan uses tax deductible dollars to acquire the insurance. Furthermore, the Plan Funds are not otherwise being directly used by qualified plan participant (Participant) for the Participant.
This is the fourth installment of a four-part series offering a model for attorneys to use when faced with the task of making sense out of a custody assessment.
As noted in Part One of this article, in Skilling v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court limited the scope of the honest services fraud statute 18 U.S.C. ' 1346) to "bribery and kickback" schemes, yet did not define what a "bribery" or "kickback" scheme must entail. So the question becomes this: Must a "bribe or kickback" involve a quid pro quo?
