Willful patent infringement just became a lot more dangerous. In a rare pro-patent holder decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s Seagate standard governing enhanced damages for willful infringement is too hard to meet.
- Justices Asked to Protect Against Ineffective Lawyers in Parental Termination Cases
- Chief Justice Roberts Misses Solo Lawyers With 'Battered Briefcases'
- High Court Challenge Could Unravel Military Death Penalty
- Supreme Court, Even Without Scalia, Still Favors Property Owners in Environmental Case
- High Court Veterans Make Arguments for Birthright Citizenship
- John Roberts Knocks Down Prosecution Bias Excuses One by One
Before former U.S. solicitor general Seth Waxman rose to argue his 75th case before the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday, it seemed to some that this milestone would be an uphill battle.
When he served as U.S. attorney for South Dakota and chairman of the U.S. Justice Department’s Native American Issues subcommittee, Brendan Johnson learned firsthand the quality of Indian tribal courts. Today, he doesn’t like the picture of tribal justice that a multibillion-dollar corporation is painting for the U.S. Supreme Court.
During his GOP presidential campaign, candidate Donald Trump triggered a debate over birthright citizenship. Now, some of the top high court advocates urge the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on what birthright citizenship means, particularly for persons born in U.S. territories.
The Supreme Court may soon be confronted with calls to overturn decades-old precedent that permits the pretrial freeze of tainted assets.
The Federal Trade Commission has finally prevailed in a long-running dispute with POM Wonderful over allegedly misleading claims about the health benefits of the company’s pomegranate products.
Prosecutors are barred from freezing criminal defendants’ assets unconnected to their alleged crimes and needed to hire defense counsel of choice, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday in a decision that crossed its liberal-conservative divide.
Writing about the U.S. Supreme Court—both fiction and nonfiction—is a growing genre, but it has its pitfalls and challenges. Five authors gathered recently to discuss their work and experiences. Georgetown's Supreme Court Institute hosted the event, and C-SPAN's Book TV aired the panel discussion on April 23.
It was a David versus Goliath battle on the field of copyright law. David emerged victorious with a little help from the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013. Now David wants more than $2 million in attorney fees. The biblical analogy came from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg during Monday's high court arguments in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons. And just like three years ago, the justices did not seem satisfied with either argument.