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
Yesterday, I reported here on a lawsuit filed March 20 in U.S. District Court in Manhattan by a legal tech executive who alleges her former company owes her over $1 million in stock and that her former boss sexually harassed her. As it turns out, just a week before she filed her lawsuit, her former company had sued her in federal court in Texas, seeking a declaratory judgment that it had terminated her for cause, and that, as a result, her stock option was also terminated.
Meghan Cole | Tips for distilling large amounts of information into comprehensible and accessible reports. The post 4 Tips for Attorneys Struggling to Manage Large Case Dockets appeared first on Articles, Tips and Tech for Law Firms & Lawyers.
I am speaking tomorrow on a CLE webinar on the state of legal technology, but the last day to register is today at 3 p.m. ET. In a program presented by the Massachusetts Bar Association, I am joining Damian Turco, MBA president and former chair of the MBA’s Law Practice Management Section, to discuss the state of legal technology in law practice.
With the legal industry poised for 5.18% annual growth, innovation is key in the face of evolving client demands and growing caseloads. Top law firms are expanding their client base with smart marketing and improved services — all while optimizing their operations for agility and efficiency. In this roundtable discussion, our panel of industry experts shared their insights into building sustained financial health and commercial success.
Finance teams find Trellis to be particularly effective in conducting comprehensive due diligence on both individuals and businesses. With our court data solution, financial experts can access critical litigation insights, making it an invaluable resource for informed decision-making in the financial sector.
A number of individual consumers have filed suit against Apple, Inc. in California and New Jersey courts, piggybacking on the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) March 21 complaint accusing Apple of “broad-based, exclusionary conduct” amounting to monopolization of the smartphone market. The DOJ’s sweeping complaint included a number of U.S. states as plaintiffs and charged Apple with “thwart[ing] innovation” and throttle[ing] competitive alternatives via its practices around the iPhone platfor
In a precedential decision authored by Chief Judge Moore, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Wednesday partially reversed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) ruling that certain claims of Virtek Vision International’s patent on a method for aligning a laser projector were unpatentable, finding the Board erred as a matter of law in its analysis.
On March 27, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential ruling in Inline Plastics Corp. v. Lacerta Group, LLC, on appeal from the District of Massachusetts. Judge Richard Taranto authored the opinion and held that an improper jury instruction given at trial by the district court required vacatur of the court’s final judgment that Inline’s patent claims were invalid for obviousness.
On March 27, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential ruling in Inline Plastics Corp. v. Lacerta Group, LLC, on appeal from the District of Massachusetts. Judge Richard Taranto authored the opinion and held that an improper jury instruction given at trial by the district court required vacatur of the court’s final judgment that Inline’s patent claims were invalid for obviousness.
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.
328 
Let's personalize your content