Sentences with phrase «subsequent federal litigation»

The article is based on Mr. Seeman's and Mr. Smith's experience representing a Connecticut soup kitchen in the local zoning process and subsequent federal litigation.

Not exact matches

(c) As to transactions entered into after May 20, 1996, a creditor shall have no liability under this chapter for any act or practice done or omitted in conformity with any (i) regulation of the administrator, or (ii) any rule, regulation, interpretation, or approval of any applicable Alabama or federal agency or any opinion of the Attorney General, notwithstanding that after such act or omission has occurred, the regulation, rule, interpretation, opinion, or approval is amended, rescinded, or determined by judicial or other authority to be invalid for any reason; provided, however, that any interpretation or opinion issued after May 20, 1996, shall not have any effect on any litigation pending on May 20, 1996, nor shall any interpretation or opinion issued after May 20, 1996, have any effect on litigation if issued subsequent to filing of the litigation.

In B&B Hardware v. Hargis Industries, the Supreme Court held that, under some circumstances, determinations by the USPTO Trademark Trial and Appeal Board could have preclusive effect in subsequent federal court litigation involving the identical issue.

In addition, although the Gunn Court noted that state court interpretations of the Patent Act would not be binding on federal courts, [10] final state court judgments determining patent issues, such as validity, infringement, or claim construction, may well be binding on a patentee in subsequent litigation involving the same or related patents.

The long - term impact of this statement will need to observed, to see whether PTAB rulings on factual issues are given preclusive effect in subsequent federal court litigation.

In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that a patent owner's statements made in a preliminary statement during an AIA inter partes review (IPR) proceeding may create prosecution disclaimer during subsequent federal court litiFederal Circuit has held that a patent owner's statements made in a preliminary statement during an AIA inter partes review (IPR) proceeding may create prosecution disclaimer during subsequent federal court litifederal court litigation.