Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Search

We found 2,772 results for "Product Liability Law & Strategy"...

Avoiding the Hazards of Acquisition: Due Diligence in the Merger or Acquisition of a Product Manufacturer
February 01, 2017
As corporations continue to reshape at a rapid rate, due diligence groundwork concerning product liability issues can be critically important. This article addresses how deals can be structured, and the areas that need to be explored, when evaluating a potential deal from the perspective of product liability.
Do Your Employment Practices Violate Antitrust Law? They Might!
February 01, 2017
Did you know that your employment practices could violate antitrust law? This is the message to be gleaned from joint guidance recently issued by the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice Antitrust Division.
Amending Patent Claims in Post-Grant Trial Proceedings
February 01, 2017
<b><i>What You Need to Know</i></b><br>The America Invents Act gave patent owners the right to move to amend their patent claims. To date, however, this right has been more illusory than real. Given their dismal success rate so far, many hope that the tide will turn in favor of granting more motions to amend.
How to Conduct Internal Investigations Efficiently and Effectively<br><i><font size="-1">A Roundtable Discussion</i></font>
February 01, 2017
Internal investigations are becoming increasingly common in the modern workplace. But how, exactly, can companies conduct investigations efficiently and effectively, while still protecting innocent employees?
Med Mal News
February 01, 2017
Discussion of two cases, one involving 2016's “Judicial Hell Holes.”
Off-Label Promotion and Product Liability Considerations
February 01, 2017
An update on the current regulatory landscape in the off-label promotional area and also review potential liability risks for companies to consider, and recommendations to reduce these risks.
Will the CT Supreme Court Reinvent Design Defect Law?<br><font size="-1"><b><i>Part One of a Two-Part Article</b></i></font>
February 01, 2017
Despite the long-standing principle in Connecticut that product liability law is premised on strict liability, the state's Supreme Court is now considering whether it should abandon its strict product liability premise for design defect claims, and replace it with section 2(b) of the Restatement (Third) of Torts.
<i><b>Legal Tech:</i></b><br>Three Legal Challenges In-House Counsel Face with 3-D Printing
February 01, 2017
<b><i>As 3-D Printing Becomes More Widespread, In-House Counsel Will Be Tasked with Complex IP and Liability Challenges</b></i><p>Yet another potentially disruptive technology is set to join the ranks of blockchain and AI as a headache for legal: 3-D printing. While its use in legal is limited, 3-D printing presents unique challenges to in-house counsel prosecuting or defending IP and liability issues.
Joint Infringement Post-Akamai: Understanding the Impact on Prosecution and Litigation Strategies<br><font size="-1"><b><i>Part 2: Decisions Since</i> Akamai <i>and Practice Insights</b></i></font>
February 01, 2017
Reviews the recent Federal Circuit <i>Eli Lilly</i> case as well as district court cases that have interpreted the new standard and identifies prosecution and litigation strategies for practicing post-<i>Akamai</i><p>
Liability Exposure When Experts Flub<br><font size="-1"><b><i>Part Two of a Two-Part Article</b></i></font>
February 01, 2017
Last month, the author began discussion of the consequences of retaining an expert witness who errs on the stand. Should the expert be subject to lawsuit for damages? Could the attorney who hired him/her be held liable? The analysis concludes here.

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 ›