Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The landmark decision of the Supreme Court in MercExchange LLC v. eBay, 547 U.S. __ (2006), has left many inventors and patent owners disappointed, as the Supreme Court sided with eBay and set aside the prior decision of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ('CAFC'). A closer reading of the decision, however, seems to indicate a balanced approach that gave both sides something to brag about.
A jury in the Eastern District of Virginia found that MercExchange's patent for an electronic exchange was valid, and that online auctioneer eBay and its affiliate Half.com had willfully infringed it though eBay's fixed-price 'Buy-it-Now' feature. They awarded MercExchange damages in the amount of $35 million. Following the jury verdict, the judge denied MercExchange's motion for a permanent injunction. The CAFC reversed that ruling, applying its 'general rule that courts will issue permanent injunctions against patent infringement absent exceptional circumstances.' The Supreme Court remanded the case to the District Court, stating that the District Court and the CAFC both erred by departing from the four-factor test in opposite directions.
The 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.
The 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.
This 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.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.