Recently on Axinn Viewpoints –April 8, 2024
A Rare Bird? TriZetto Collects $14.5M in Attorneys' Fees but No Trade Secret Damages.? A claimant's recovery of attorneys' fees in a trade secret action ordinarily reflects an overwhelming success at trial. The claimant would have necessarily proved (at least under federal law) that its trade secret had been willfully or maliciously...Read more
Nokia and the Burden of Burdens.? Much like secondary considerations, non-infringing alternatives fit imperfectly within many scheduling orders. The patentee has the burden of proof on damages, but it is the accused infringer who must prove that any non-infringing alternatives...Read more
ABA Antitrust Law Spring Meeting.? Axinn is proud to be participating in the 72nd ABA Antitrust Law Spring Meeting and other adjacent events. The Spring Meeting is the largest gathering of competition, consumer protection, and data privacy professionals globally, with lawyers,...Read more
ChromaDex Stands Out, But Not in a Good Way.? The law of patent eligibility was pretty quiet for decades until the Supreme Court breathed new life into Section 101 invalidity challenges in a series of decisions starting in 2010 with Bilski v. Kappos. In its current state, the law has...Read more
The Rise of Labor Issues as an Antitrust Priority.? Maryanne Magnier and I have drafted an article titled, “The Rise of Labor Issues as an Antitrust Priority.” The article will soon appear in the Emory Corporate Governance and Accountability Review's special symposium issue titled “The Antitrust...Read more
Puma and the Pitfalls of the “Narrow” Exclusive License.? Puma Biotechnology is the latest victim of standing requirements in patent cases that continue to wreak havoc on plaintiffs’ ability to recover a full measure of damages.? In Puma Biotechnology, Inc. v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP,...Read more