Expert Analysis

• The Case For Using Final-Offer Damages Forms In IP Suits

  

  Recent Federal Circuit decisions, such as Ollnova v. Ecobee, that scrutinize verdict forms in patent infringement disputes potentially render the final-offer damages selection procedure more attractive, though it should not be seen as a replacement for patent damages doctrine, says Brandon Theiss at Addy Hart.

• 3 Litigation Strategies To Stay Ahead Of Bad Facts

  

  A case with damaging facts can still be won if, instead of avoiding the facts, attorneys proactively address them by carefully selecting a strategy of confronting, containing or reframing, says Allison Rocker at Baker McKenzie.

• Key Tips For Patenting Antibody-Drug Conjugate Inventions

  

  Recent decisions highlight the significant challenges that can arise when patenting antibody-drug conjugates, which require strategic considerations for satisfying heightened written description and enablement requirements, says Xiaoban Xin at FisherBroyles.

• $885M IBS Drug Verdict Tests Pay-For-Delay Limits

  

  The outcome in the Amitiza Antitrust Litigation is significant because it is the first jury trial win for private antitrust plaintiffs in a suit challenging a patent settlement reverse payment since the U.S. Supreme Court adopted the rule-of-reason legal framework in 2013, offering a blueprint for pay-for-delay claims, say attorneys at Katten.

• Series

  Power To The Paralegals: Burnout As A Structural Problem

  

  Law firm leadership can best retain their paralegals not by encouraging self-care, but by seeking top-down structural solutions for the quiet proliferation of responsibilities and the vicarious exposure to client trauma that particularly drive burnout in this vital role, says Erika Sneeringer at Brockstedt Mandalas.

• Fed. Circ. In May: Being Precise About 'About'

  

  The Federal Circuit's decision in Enviro Tech v. Safe Foods last month illustrates the danger in attempting to expand claim scope with words of approximation, potentially causing claims to be invalid for lack of definiteness, say attorneys at Knobbe Martens.

• Ill. Law Firm MSO Bill Clashes With Court Power, Ethics Rules

  

  An Illinois bill prohibiting law firms from certain business arrangements with management service organizations, sent to the governor for signature last week, encroaches upon the courts' constitutional powers and goes beyond the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct in regulating investment in law-related services, says Matthew O’Hara at Smith Gambrell.

• The Future Of WDTX Patent Litigation After Judge Albright

  

  With U.S. District Judge Christopher Wolfe set to take over much of Judge Alan Albright's patent infringement docket in the Western District of Texas later this year, attorneys should prepare for potential differences in Judge Wolfe's approach to the court's high volume of patent litigation, say attorneys at Sidley Austin.

• Constructing AI Compliance Plans As State Laws Diverge

  

  With Colorado, Connecticut and the federal government recently announcing wildly different approaches to artificial intelligence regulation, creating a workable compliance program means addressing overlapping obligations using shared systems rather than separate silos, say attorneys at Ogletree.

• As Quantum Computing Evolves, So Do Antitrust Risks

  

  Amid quantum computing's increased strategic importance there are five potential antitrust fault lines that may arise not only between quantum developers, but also within and across the layers of the stack as the industry matures, say attorneys at Proskauer.

• Opinion

  State Courts Must Be Gatekeepers Of Expert Testimony

  

  Based on my experience in the state judiciary, emulating federal courts' role as gatekeepers of expert witness testimony would help state court judges maintain the appearance of impartiality and assist juries, thus enhancing the overall confidence people have in their justice system, says Lorie Gildea at Greenberg Traurig.

• 5 Key Factors Behind USPTO's Inter Partes Review Decisions

  

  Though U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Director John Squires has drawn criticism for failing to explain his reasoning in inter partes review decisions, his recent precedential order in Magnolia v. Kurin provides five important insights into his decision-making process, says Christopher Loh at Venable.

• Series

  Moshing Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Entering a mosh pit is much like entering the practice of law — it is difficult, you have to know both the written and unwritten rules, and conduct yourself according to the expectations of each community, says Christopher Deubert at Constangy Brooks.

• Why Highly Specialized Experts May Risk Exclusion At Trial

  

  Expert witnesses with highly specific areas of focus may be vulnerable to exclusion in court, making it important for attorneys to check how potential witnesses' qualifications can be bolstered by their publications and other professional activities, say Evan Weisberg and Christopher Cunio at Hunton, and Kevin Cahill at FTI Consulting.

• Trump AI Order: Voluntary Framework, Mandatory Implications

  

  President Donald Trump's recent executive order promoting the advancement of artificial intelligence innovation and security establishes a new framework for government collaboration with the AI industry, but its classified benchmarking criteria, prerelease framework terms and operational rules will determine whether it establishes de facto compliance expectations, say attorneys at Ropes & Gray.