This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Called Litigation Footprint, it provides a visual overview of the federal and state courts across the country in which a party has litigated, derived from the litigation histories of parties in over 27 million cases filed in 94 federal district courts and over 1,300 state courts in 34 states and the District of Columbia.
The letter sent last week was organized by Lawyers for Civil Justice (LCJ) and signed by some of the world’s largest and most well-known corporations, including all of the major internet platforms, pharmaceutical and automotive companies.
Similarly, a car manufacturer can simply rely on communication technologies developed by telecom experts outside the automotive ecosystem to guarantee connectivity to its fleet and the corresponding massive economic benefits.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on Monday vacated and remanded a district court decision that had dismissed Continental Automotive Systems, Inc.’s s suit against several standard-essential patent holders and their licensing agent, claiming violations of federal antitrust law and state law.
A normal week at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and a heavy week in the district courts saw 100 new patent complaints filed and 30 petitions before the Board; there were 79 district court terminations as well, as cases settled quickly and a number of withdrawals or refilings continue in and out of the Western District of Texas.
In 2018, Alper Automotive, Inc. DDI took a license in 2016 to the copyright for artwork created by Harold Walters for a set of replacement stickers for the dashboard climate controls for certain General Motors vehicles. began selling a sticker that DDI alleged infringed the licensed copyright.
One of the issues considered by Mrs Justice Bacon in Vauxhall Motors Ltd & Ors v Denso Automotive UK Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 213 (Ch) was whether an order extending time for service of the claim form should be.
For now, the SEC is lumped in with other unsecured litigants and suppliers that dont have claims on any specific collateral, ranging from Microsoft Corp. to Smithers Tire & Automotive Testing. Its unclear whether the company will have to pay the remainder when the bankruptcy is settled.
On the other hand, Abdi Aidid practiced as a commercial litigator in New York before becoming the Vice President of Legal Research at Blue J. And I practice for a few years as a commercial litigator in New York, focusing on complex corporate litigation and arbitration. And in that time, I quite enjoyed what I was doing.
Summary – Automotive Engineering Expert Witness testimony allowed even though the defendant argued that the expert witness did not physically test any of the alternate vehicle designs. The plaintiff hired Automotive Engineering Expert Witness Mr. Brian Herbst to provide expert witness testimony. Honda Motor Company, Ltd.
Merck Patent GmbH, vacating the Patent Trial and Appeal Boards (PTAB) determination that CQV failed to show the unpatentability of Merck patent claims to pearlescent automotive coatings in post-grant review (PGR) proceedings. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in CQV Co.,
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content