Employees' Inventions: Who Owns What Rights?
March 28, 2008
What rights does an employer have in an employee's patent? The short answer is, it depends. The employer may have a right of assignment — that is, a right to outright ownership of the patent. Another possibility is a so-called 'shop right,' in which the employee owns the patent, but the employer has a non-exclusive, non-transferable license to use the invention in its business. There is also a distinct possibility that the employer has no rights whatsoever in the patent.
Strategic Uses of a Rule 2004 Exam
March 28, 2008
While most bankruptcy practitioners are familiar with the basic concepts behind the Rule 2004 exam, some are less familiar with the procedural intricacies of obtaining, conducting, and responding to the exam ' intricacies that often involve practices and procedures adapted from civil discovery that are beyond the scope of pure bankruptcy practice. This article explains.
The Progressive Lawyer: Pretrial and Trial Strategies for Family Law Cases
March 28, 2008
One of the greatest opportunities for immediate improvement in the practice of matrimonial law lies in the cultivation of the binocular mindset. Binocularity involves the balancing of the settlement mindset with the trial mindset. This balancing occurs even in situations in which the practicing attorney has no intention of ever going to trial.
Litigation
February 27, 2008
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
Relocation Issues
February 27, 2008
In this day and age, when family units break apart and realign regularly, when employment is more transient than permanent, when transportation is affordable and global communication is instantaneous, relocating to another city or state, or even another country, is more common than ever. While the reasons for moving seem countless, a primary residential parent's ability to relocate with the children may be severally limited by the laws in his or her state.
Litigating with the EEOC
February 26, 2008
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has a statutory obligation to conciliate in good faith with employers prior to initiating litigation. This is a well-known obligation, but it is not always carried out in a manner that is fair to employers. In recent years, employers have become increasingly frustrated with the EEOC's approach to conciliation, particularly where it seems that the EEOC is more concerned with pursuing litigation than with attempting to eliminate alleged discriminatory practices voluntarily through conciliation.
Arbitration Under Duress
February 26, 2008
The use of mandatory arbitration provisions in employment contracts has grown in recent years as employers seek to avoid what is perceived as 'time-consuming' and 'costly' litigation in state or federal courts. Of course, whether or not arbitration actually saves time or money is an issue open for debate. One only has to receive the pre-hearing invoice from three panelists at $500 per hour to question the latter benefit.
The Latest on 'No Match' Letters
February 26, 2008
Part One of this article described the background, key provisions and legal challenges to the 'No-Match' regulations. The conclusion herein offers strategies for employers.
Think You Know What Constitutes Good Cause?
February 26, 2008
Most standard employment agreements and personnel policies include provisions that condition the receipt of certain benefits or trigger certain disciplinary actions on the basis of 'good cause' or 'cause.' Many employers believe that since they make the first call as to whether cause exists, that is the final call. However, as demonstrated by the jury verdict in a recent Maryland trial, it is the jury, not the employer, that gets to make the final call as to whether cause exists.
Collective Bargaining Aftermath
February 26, 2008
A discussion of the aftermath of the recent decision, <i>In re Northwest Airlines Corp.</i>, 483 F.3d 160 (2d Cir. 2007), in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that a federal court may enjoin a strike by employees covered under the Railway Labor Act (the 'RLA') following rejection of their collective bargaining agreement.
