Development
September 01, 2003
Cases of importance to your practice.
Hidden Defects in Title
September 01, 2003
<b><i>All About the 'New Predatory Lending Law'</i></b> Hidden defects in title are one of the nightmares of the title insurance industry - as well as one of the protections that make the purchase of title insurance the more alluring. Although only experience may supply the ultimate answer, there is a possibility that the new "predatory lending law" in New York will generate lurking infirmities in titles devolving through mortgage foreclosure actions that may render tenuous the issuance of insurance on such properties.
So Far So Good for the Legal Industry
September 01, 2003
It's been a dramatic year so far for the legal industry, with signs of improvement evident, according to Hildebrandt International's mid-year report. The company provided a summary of the report for <i>Law Firm Partnership & Benefits</i>.
Selecting New Partners
September 01, 2003
Over the past year and a half, the recession has sparked a dramatic rise in lateral partner moves as law firms have tried to expand active practice areas and partners have sought safety in ever-larger firms.
Use of Debit and Credit Cards by Cafeteria Plans Approved
September 01, 2003
The Internal Revenue Service has ruled for the first time that properly substantiated employer-provided medical expense reimbursements made through debit or credit cards under a health reimbursement arrangement (HRA) or health care flexible spending account (HCFSA) are excludable from gross income under Section 105(b) (Rev. Rul. 2003-43). The use of debit or credit cards by HRAs and HCFSAs will greatly streamline the reimbursement process and will eliminate employees' out of pocket expenses at the point of service - making these programs much more appealing to employees.
Around The Firms
September 01, 2003
Attorney movement among major law firms and corporations.
Is Your Process Patent Being Circumvented? Housey Forces Another Look at Section 271 Protections for Information-Producing Patented Processes
September 01, 2003
Patents containing process claims, especially those where the result of the process is information, such as some research method, business method or software, Internet or telephone-based process patents, may be among the most valuable elements of a portfolio. If used defensively, such patents may provide a competitive advantage to the owner or prevent competitors from entering into a key line of business. If used offensively, these patents offer licensing opportunities on transactions that may occur millions of times per year. Potential licensees that wish to practice the patented processes described above, however, may choose a course other than licensing — practicing the process abroad and sending the resulting information back into the United States. The recent case of <i>Bayer AG v. Housey Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,</i> No. 02-1598, slip op. (Fed. Cir. Aug. 22, 2003), construing 35 U.S.C. '271(g), may make it more difficult to enforce these process patents with respect to such outsourcing and importing activities.
Practicing Before the Court of Federal Claims
September 01, 2003
As the single largest user of cutting-edge technology in the world, the United States, with its powers of eminent domain, is one of the world's largest infringing entities. While the U.S. government frequently uses patented technology without first obtaining a license, many patent owners are reluctant to bring suit against the government for infringement. One apparent reason for this recalcitrance is that many patent owners are unfamiliar with the court in which such actions must be brought: the Court of Federal Claims. Because bringing suit for patent infringement in the Court of Federal Claims differs from practicing in federal district court, there are several factors of which patent owners should be aware in order to successfully prosecute claims in this court.
