sa¹ú¼Ê´«Ã½

Expert Analysis

• Patent Claim Lessons From Fed. Circ.'s Teva Decision

  

  The Federal Circuit's recent decision in Janssen v. Teva is an important precedent for parties drafting patent claims or litigating obviousness where the prior art has potentially overlapping ranges for a claimed element, and may be particularly instructive to patent applicants in the pharmaceutical field, say attorneys at Cooley.

• Series

  Law School's Missed Lessons: Adapting To The Age Of AI

  

  Though law school may not have specifically taught us how to use generative artificial intelligence to help with our daily legal tasks, it did provide us the mental building blocks necessary for adapting to this new technology — and the judgment to discern what shouldn’t be automated, says Pamela Dorian at Cozen O'Connor.

• Ch. 11 Ruling Voiding $2M Litigation Funding Sends A Warning

  

  A recent Texas bankruptcy court decision that a postconfirmation litigation trust has no obligations to repay a completely drawn down $2 million litigation funding agreement serves as a warning for estate administrators and funders to properly disclose the intended financing, say attorneys at Kleinberg Kaplan.

• DOJ's Novel Cybersecurity FCA Case Is A Warning To Medtech

  

  The U.S. Department of Justice's recent False Claims Act settlement with Illumina over alleged cybersecurity deficiencies suggests that enforcement agencies and whistleblowers are focusing attention toward cybersecurity in life sciences and medical tech, but also reveals key unanswered questions about the legal viability of such allegations, say attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• Future-Proof Patent Law By Starting Talent Pipelines Early

  

  Law firms struggling with a narrow talent pipeline in the intellectual property space should consider beginning their recruitment strategies for potential candidates as early as high school, and raise awareness for career opportunities that do not require a law degree, says Christine Hollis at Marshall Gerstein.

• Demystifying The Civil Procedure Rules Amendment Process

  

  Every year, an advisory committee receives dozens of proposals to amend the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, most of which are never adopted — but a few pointers can help maximize the likelihood that an amendment will be adopted, says Josh Gardner at DLA Piper.

• How USPTO Examiner Memo Informs Software Patent Drafting

  

  A memorandum recently released by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office provides useful clues as to how the USPTO and examining corps will evaluate claims in software-implemented inventions for subject matter eligibility going forward, says Michael Lew at Squire Patton.

• How 2nd Circ. Cannabis Ruling Upends NY Licensing

  

  A recent Second Circuit decision in Variscite NY Four v. New York, holding that New York's extra-priority cannabis licensing preference for applicants with in-state marijuana convictions violates the dormant commerce clause, underscores that state-legal cannabis markets remain subject to the same constitutional constraints as other economic markets, say attorneys at Harris Beach.

• Parenting Skills That Can Help Lawyers Thrive Professionally

  

  As kids head back to school, the time is ripe for lawyers who are parents to consider how they can incorporate their parenting skills to build a deep, meaningful and sustainable legal practice, say attorneys at Alston & Bird.

• Enablement Standard Insights From Fed. Circ. Agilent Ruling

  

  The Federal Circuit's recent enablement standard decision in Agilent v. Synthego underscores three critical takeaways for patent practitioners, including reaffirmation that the enablement inquiry under Section 102 of the Patent Act is distinct from the inquiry under Section 112, say attorneys at MoFo.

• Series

  Teaching Trial Advocacy Makes Us Better Lawyers

  

  Teaching trial advocacy skills to other lawyers makes us better litigators because it makes us question our default methods, connect to young attorneys with new perspectives and focus on the needs of the real people at the heart of every trial, say Reuben Guttman, Veronica Finkelstein and Joleen Youngers.

• The Crucial Question Left Unanswered In EpicentRx Decision

  

  The California Supreme Court recently issued its long-awaited decision in EpicentRx Inc. v. Superior Court, resolving a dispute regarding the enforceability of forum selection clauses, but the question remains whether private companies can trust that courts will continue to consistently enforce forum selection clauses in corporate charters, says John Yow at Yow PC.

• Federal AI Action Plan Marks A Shift For Health And Bio Fields

  

  The Trump administration's recent artificial intelligence action plan significantly expands federal commitments across biomedical agencies, defining a pivotal moment for attorneys and others involved in research collaborations, managing regulatory compliance and AI-related intellectual property, says Mehrin Masud-Elias at Arnold & Porter.

• Preparing For DEA Rescheduling Of 2 Research Chemicals

  

  A recent decision to allow the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to reclassify two research psychedelics in Schedule I under the Controlled Substances Act may pose significant barriers to scientific study, including stringent registration requirements, heightened security protocols and burdensome reporting obligations, say Kimberly Chew at Husch Blackwell and Jackie von Salm at Psilera.

• Why EpicentRx Ruling Is A Major Win For Business Certainty

  

  The California Supreme Court's recent decision in EpicentRx v. Superior Court removes a significant source of uncertainty that plagued commercial litigation in California by clarifying that forum selection clauses shouldn't be invalidated solely because the selected forum lacks the right to a jury trial, say attorneys at Clark Hill.