Motion Success After Alice (E.D. Tex.)

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Excalibur Bakery V. Excellent Bakery The case of invalid trademark.

Advertisements

Pre-Answer Motions. 12(b)(1) Subject Matter Jurisdiction Should have been in state rather than federal court 12(b)(2) Personal Jurisdiction This court.

The Brave New World of Class Certification in Antitrust Cases Dallas Bar Association Antitrust & Trade Regulation Section March 24, 2011 Dallas Bar Association.

Quackenbush & The Final Judgment Rule. Quackenbush – Proceedings Below Who was the plaintiff? State Insurance Commissioner In what capacity? Trustee of.

The Process of Litigation. What is the first stage in a civil lawsuit ?  Service of Process (the summons)

Order granting a motion to dismiss under 12(b)(1) – lack of subject matter jurisdiction? Order granting a motion to dismiss under 12(b)(2) – lack of personal.

© 2005 by Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved.1 CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION ATTACKING THE PLEADINGS.

Forum Selection Clauses in Texas David Coale and Casey Kaplan Wednesday, November 19, 2008.

Why Did the Number of New Patent Cases Stop Rising? By Greg Upchurch LegalMetric Director of Research J.D.-Yale Law School Adjunct Professor-Washington.

Chapter 3 Court Procedures Copyright © 2009 South-Western Legal Studies in Business, a part of South-Western Cengage Learning. Jentz Miller Cross BUSINESS.

Meeting of the Saskatchewan Administrative Tribunals Association Presentation by Steven D. Schiefner Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board.

Greg Gardella Patent Reexamination: Effective Strategy for Litigating Infringement Claims Best Practices for Pursuing and Defending Parallel Proceedings.

 Any defendant who fails to timely file a response to a Complaint is considered to be a “Defendant in Default”  Defendant in Default can still file a.

Stephen J. Ware Professor of Law University of Kansas.

Recent Court Decisions Impacting Review Proceedings Under The AIA J. Steven Baughman Ropes & Gray LLP Nancy J. Linck, Esq. Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck.

Introduction to Civil Procedure in the United States Wake Forest LLM Introduction to American Law Alan R. Palmiter – Sep

Agenda for 24th Class Name plates out Subject matter jurisdiction

Residential Eviction Quick Guide Due Process and Summary Procedure.

Litigation Jody Blanke Professor of Computer Information Systems and Law.

Court Procedures Chapter 3.

Tues. Oct. 29. venue in federal court Sec Venue generally (b) Venue in general.--A civil action may be brought in-- (1) a judicial district.

© 2005 by Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved.1 CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION AMENDING THE PLEADINGS.

Wed., Oct. 15. venue in federal court Sec Venue generally (b) Venue in general.--A civil action may be brought in-- (1) a judicial district.

SHOPPING: ISN’T THAT THE AMERICAN WAY? Mary B. Graham Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP Wilmington, Delaware Symposium On Ethical Issues in Patent Law.

Announcements  Your research take home exams are due Tuesday 1/18.  The research class is at 3:00 in 273 on Tuesday.  Class next Thursday is at 3:00.

CHAPTER 3: LITIGATION. Chapter 32 Learning Objectives: Basic Principles Relating to Litigation The Place of Litigation Pre-Trial Proceedings Trial Post-Trial.

© 2005 by Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved.1 CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION TRIAL-SETTING PROCEDURES.

1 Overview of Legal Process in IP Cases From notes by Steve Baron © Ed Lamoureux/Steve Baron.

Thurs. Nov. 1. waiver of defenses FRCP 12(g) Joining Motions. (1) Right to Join. A motion under this rule may be joined with any other motion allowed.

Brown: Legal Terminology, 5 th ed. © 2008 Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ All Rights Reserved. Legal Terminology Fifth Edition by Gordon.

March 4, 2011 Civil Procedure.

1 1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association ABSTRACT IDEAS – ULTRAMERCIAL AND BEYOND Joseph A. Calvaruso AIPLA 2015 Mid-Winter.

Case Summary On April 11, 1984, an anterior resection surgery of the colon and hysterectomy was perfomed on Natividad Agana at the Medical City Hospital.

Chapter 03 The U.S. Legal System McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2012 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 16 Professor Fischer Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Sept. 28, 2005.

National Lead Litigation Conference 2015 November 5-6, 2015.

BEST PRACTICES FOR CIVIL LAWYERS -SMOOTH SAILING IN THE SOMETIMES CHOPPY WATERS OF FEDERAL COURT- Magistrate Judge Michelle H. Burns District of Arizona.

CIVIL PROCEDURE FALL 2003 CLASS 3 (8/29/03) STAGES AND ESSENTIAL CONCEPTS OF A CIVIL ACTION Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Professor.

PA110 Civil Litigation I Unit 8 Seminar Instructor: Brian Craig.

Chapter 3 The U.S. Legal System Chapter 3: The U.S. Legal System

Possessory Interest Tax Litigation Update

CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION

Standard of Review & “Facts” on Appeal

Thurs., Aug. 29.

Chapter 4 Resolving Disputes: Litigation and Alternative Dispute

Paula sues Daniel, a New York domiciliary, in Hawaii state court

Best Practices for eDiscovery in Patent Litigation

IDENTIFICATION OF Trade secrets IN LITIGATION

§ 101 Motion Success After Alice (Nationwide)

Patent litigation trends after TC Heartland

Biosimilars: Regulation and Litigation

Inn of Court AC This material is not intended as legal advice and does not necessarily represent the views of our firm, clients, or the presenters. January,

Kentucky State Knights of Columbus Billings

Jody Blanke Professor of Computer Information Systems and Law

Motion to Transfer Success Rates Before and After TC Heartland

Thurs., Oct. 25.

Jody Blanke, Professor Computer Information Systems and Law

Overview of Legal Process in IP Cases

Thurs., Sept. 1.

Michael Sacksteder Chair, Patent Litigation Group Fenwick & West LLP

Anatomy of a Lawsuit 1/17/2019.

Thurs., Oct. 18.

PTAB Litigation 2016 Part 4 – The Institution Decision

TOOLKIT Idea Fact-Finding Feasibility Business Planning Implementation

§ 101 Motion Success After Alice

Overview of Legal Process in IP Cases

“The View From the Corner of U.S. Competition Law and Patents”

Overview of Legal Process in IP Cases

Pacific Legal Foundation

Presentation transcript:

Motion Success After Alice (E.D. Tex.) Number of Cases Year * Thru March 31, 2016.

Motion Success After Alice (N.D. Cal.) Number of Cases Year * Thru March 31, 2016.

Motion Success After Alice (D. Del.) Number of Cases Year * Thru March 31, 2016.

Motion Success After Alice (E.D. Tex., N.D. Cal., D. Del.) Number of Cases Year * Thru March 31, 2016.

Motion Success After Alice (All Jurisdictions) Number of Cases Year * Thru March 31, 2016.

Motion Success After Alice (All Jurisdictions) Granted Denied Partial Stage* # % 2014 Early 11 31% 6 17% 1 3% Late 13 37% 4 11% 0% Total 24 69% 10 29% 2015 57 36% 39 25% 1% 34 21% 26 16% 2 91 57% 65 41% 3 2% 2016** 15 35% 17 40% 5% 9% 5 12% 19 44% 22 51% * Refers to stage in litigation. Early stages include motions to dismiss and motions for judgment on the pleadings. Later stages include motions for summary judgment and other motions made thereafter. ** Thru March 31, 2016.