Most Recent Blog Posts
Patent holders bringing infringement suits sometimes unnecessarily assert that a competitor infringes an unreasonable number of patent claims.
The District of Minnesota is one of the busiest courts in the nation. The District also carries a greater than average load of patent cases. The Senior Status Judges in the District take a full case load, but do not handle patent cases.
When should a company facing charges of patent infringement be required to recall the accused products? A recent District of Minnesota decision noted the absence of controlling authority on that question, but ordered a recall nonetheless.
District of Minnesota Holds that Mayo, Myriad, and Alice Apply to Dog-Eat-Dog World of Canine Genetic Testing
On March 31 in Genetic Veterinary Sciences, Inc., d/b/a Paw Print Genetics v. Canine EIC Genetics, LLC, No. 14-CV-1598 (JRT/JJK), Judge John R. Tunheim addressed the question of whether veterinarians can obtain patents for identifying genetic markers of canine disease.
Many companies accused of infringement have turned to Inter Partes Review (IPR) as an alternate route for challenging the validity of patent claims. But what happens if an accused infringer moves to stay litigation in light of a pending IPR petition?
Last week, a group of 144 business leaders, entrepreneurs, investors and philanthropists petitioned the SEC to require public companies to disclose their political spending.
SEC Commissioner Aguilar recently reiterated a request that he introduced in 2009 by calling for a NASAA representative to be embedded at the SEC.
Ever since the Dodd-Frank Act made the SEC’s choice of forum more permissive, the SEC has been pursuing enforcement actions through administrative proceedings rather than filing charges in federal district court.
Magistrate Judge Bowbeer recently granted Plaintiff Polaris Industries Inc.’s motion for a protective order preventing testimony on a Rule 30(b)(6) topic relating to disputed prior art.
On Wednesday, the SEC proposed rules to require pay-for-performance disclosure as mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act. The proposal would require companies to include a new table in their proxy statements that shows compensation “actually paid” to top executives, as well as the total shareholder return (TSR), as defined in Regulation S-K, on an annual basis for the company and the peer group selected by the company for its stock performance graph or CD&A. Compensation “actually paid” is derived from the current summary compensation table, except that pension amounts are adjusted and equity awards are considered paid only when vested and are valued as of the vesting date.