Helsinn Healthcare v. TEVA Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
A sale to a third party, even with a confidentiality obligation, may still qualify as a “sale” under The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1).
Area(s) of Law:- Patents
New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira
Courts, not arbitrators, determine the applicability of Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act, and the term “contracts of employment” applies broadly to include agreements to perform work.
Area(s) of Law:- Arbitration
Culbertson v. Berryhill
Section 406 (a) and (b) of the Social Security Act separately address fees to be awarded to attorneys that represent claimants at the agency stage and in court, not an aggregate amount for both.
Area(s) of Law:- Attorney Fees
City of Escondido, California v. Marty Emmons
Government officials enjoy qualified immunity only when an official's conduct does not violate clearly established rights, both statutory and constitutional, of which a reasonable person would have known. This clearly established right must be specifically defined to trigger a determination of qualified immunity.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Shoop v. Hill
Whether the decision in Hill v. Anderson, 881 F. 3d 483 (2018) violated 28 U.S.C. §2254(d)(1) by applying case law which was not “clearly established” at the time of state adjudication.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure