Intellectual Property

Intellectual property disputes take place on a daily basis in a variety of venues. From an employee’s right to a patent of company-developed products to patent wars between international companies for illegal use of a product/logo, the National Law Review is a great resource for updates on all things IP. The site covers litigation at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the  Patent Trial and Board Appeals (PTAB), as well as cases in front of the International Trade Commission (ITC) for international patent disputes. The National Law Review covers cases heard by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), or appeals which are now sitting in front of the patent-board on Inter partes review (IPR). Additionally, the National Law Review covers cases and decisions of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

Copyrights, patent infringement claims, trade secrets, false advertising claims, unfair competition, and intellectual property laws which govern patent-litigation, are all areas which the National Law Review covers, in detail for readers. Patent disputes don’t only occur in the United States. When international countries including the United Kingdom, Brazil, China, India, and the European Union get involved, international laws are also taken into consideration by the PTO. Additionally, information on how to obtain patent protection internationally is also available on the National Law Review.

Intellectual property news on the National Law Review spans from topics including biosimilars, domain name registration, generic top-level domains (gTLDs), drug patents, non-compete agreements, trade secrets, and other industry-related battles which ensue, are covered on the site. Visitors can read about the latest legislation, laws, and news, as it relates to patents and intellectual property in general. Further, visitors to the National Law Review are going to find the latest stories and litigation as it unfolds in front of patent courts across the land. From email and data retention policies, patent disputes over medical devices, cloud computing and artificial intelligence the National Law Review has the details and expert intellectual property litigation legal analysis readers count on.

For hourly updates on the latest news about Intellectual Property Law, IP Litigation, Patent Legislation, and more, be sure to follow our IP Law Twitter feed, and sign up for complimentary e-news bulletins.

Custom text Title Organization
May
10
2016
Smart Modular Tech v. Netlist: Final Written Decision with Dissent Differing with Majority’s Technical Analysis IPR2014-01374 Faegre Drinker
May
10
2016
Pescetarian’s Delight: Ninth Circuit Extends Non-Compete Term Beyond Contractual Period Mintz
May
10
2016
Spotify, NMPA Accused of Concerted Effort to Taint Class Pool Proskauer Rose LLP
May
10
2016
PTO Litigation Center Report – May 10, 2016 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
May
10
2016
USPTO Issues Subject Matter Eligibility Update Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
May
10
2016
UK: Repeal of Section 52 CDPA – Days of Replica Goods are Numbered Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP
May
9
2016
Changes to China’s High and New Technology Enterprise (HNTE) Regime Both Sharpen its Focus and Make its Advantages More Broadly Available McDermott Will & Emery
May
9
2016
Federal Circuit Rejects Attempt to Limit Venue in Patent Cases Polsinelli PC
May
9
2016
Defend Trade Secrets Act – Coming to Federal Court Near You Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
May
9
2016
Patent Claim for Rapid Display of Geospatial Data is Abstract, but Patent-Eligible under Alice Test Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP
May
9
2016
Uniform Federal Protection for Trade Secrets Under Newly Passed Defend Trade Secrets Act Of 2016 Stark & Stark
May
9
2016
PTO Litigation Center Report – May 9, 2016 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
May
9
2016
Mobotix Corp. v. ComCam International: Denying Motion to Exclude Evidence Going to Weight of Testimony IPR2015-00093 Faegre Drinker
May
9
2016
New USPTO Guidance On Patent Eligibility Of Diagnostic Methods Foley & Lardner LLP
May
7
2016
USPTO Releases Patent Eligibility Update Foley & Lardner LLP
May
6
2016
Defend Trade Secrets Act: Notice Requirement Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
May
6
2016
An Overview of the USTR’s 2016 Special 301 Report on the State of IPR in Russia Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
May
6
2016
New (and Improved?) PTO Guidelines on Biotech Patent-Eligibility Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
May
6
2016
International Trade Commission Invalidates Patents to Fitness Monitoring Systems as Ineligible under § 101 Michael Best & Friedrich LLP
May
6
2016
PTO Litigation Center Report – May 6, 2016 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
May
6
2016
Explaining the Provisions of the Defend Trade Secrets Act Mintz
May
6
2016
Do the New PTAB Rules Drive You to Drink? IMS Legal Strategies
May
5
2016
Copyright Basics for Startups and Entrepreneurs Odin, Feldman & Pittleman, P.C.
May
5
2016
Do You Really Think Supreme Court Had This in Mind… Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.
May
5
2016
Rah! Rah! Sis Boom Bah! Supreme Court to Decide Whether Copyright Act Protects Cheerleader Uniform Designs Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
May
5
2016
Hail Mary to U.S. Supreme Court? Owner of REDSKINS Marks Petitions for Hearing on Constitutionality of Section 2(a) of Lanham Act Katten
May
5
2016
PTO Litigation Center Report – May 5, 2016 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
May
5
2016
US Employers Take Notice: Defend Trade Secrets Act Contains Noteworthy New Provisions Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP
May
5
2016
Mobotix Corp. v. ComCam International: Final Written Decision Finding Some Challenged Claims Unpatentable IPR2015-00093 Faegre Drinker
May
5
2016
Are Drug Prices Really Too High? Foley & Lardner LLP
May
5
2016
New Federal Legislation to Assist Employers in Protecting Trade Secrets Godfrey & Kahn S.C.
May
4
2016
New Federal Trade Secret Act: What Employers Need to Know Holland & Hart LLP
May
4
2016
PTO Litigation Center Report – May 4, 2016 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.
May
4
2016
District Court Applies Mayo To Treatment Claims But Denies Motion To Dismiss BMS Keytruda Litigation Foley & Lardner LLP
May
3
2016
Bio-rad Laboratories v. California Institute of Tech: Final Written Decision Finding No Inconsistency between Expert Testimony and Earlier Paper by Same Expert IPR2015-00009 Faegre Drinker
 

NLR Logo

We collaborate with the world's leading lawyers to deliver news tailored for you. Sign Up to receive our free e-Newsbulletins

 

Sign Up for e-NewsBulletins