RopesTalk

In its May 30, 2017 decision in Impression Products v. Lexmark International, the U.S. Supreme Court expanded the scope of the patent exhaustion doctrine – a decision that could have substantial effects on patent owner rights, licensing practices, and what companies and consumers may do with products they buy. Ropes & Gray IP litigation counsel Matt Rizzolo (Washington, D.C.) and associate Henry Huang (Silicon Valley) discuss the Court’s ruling and its implications.

In its May 30, 2017 decision in Impression Products v. Lexmark International, the U.S. Supreme Court expanded the scope of the patent exhaustion doctrine – a decision that could have substantial effects on patent owner rights, licensing practices, and what companies and consumers may do with products they buy. Ropes & Gray IP litigation counsel Matt Rizzolo (Washington, D.C.) and associate Henry Huang (Silicon Valley) discuss the Court’s ruling and its implications.

In this Ropes & Gray podcast, asset management partner Isabel Dische and tax partner Brett Robbins discuss the effect of Section 457A on pre-2009 management and incentive fees and charitable planning strategies that can be implemented this year to reduce 2017’s tax burden.

In a recently released Ropes & Gray podcast, asset management partner Isabel Dische, tax partner Brett Robbins, and private client partner Cameron Casey discuss the effect of Section 457A on pre-2009 management and incentive fees and charitable planning strategies that can be implemented this year to reduce 2017’s tax burden.

In a recently released Ropes & Gray podcast, asset management partner Isabel Dische, tax partner Brett Robbins, and private client partner Cameron Casey discuss the effect of Section 457A on pre-2009 management and incentive fees and charitable planning strategies that can be implemented this year to reduce 2017’s tax burden.

The pending Supreme Court case of Impression Products v. Lexmark International could affect what companies and consumers do with products they buy, based on the doctrine of patent exhaustion. Following oral argument on March 21, Megan Baca and Matt Rizzolo from Ropes & Gray’s intellectual property practices discuss the background of the case and potential consequences.

The pending Supreme Court case of Impression Products v. Lexmark International could affect what companies and consumers do with products they buy, based on the doctrine of patent exhaustion.  Following oral argument on March 21, three attorneys from Ropes & Gray’s intellectual property practices discuss the background of the case and potential consequences.  Hear commentary from Megan Baca, a partner in IP transactions, and Matt Rizzolo and Henry Huang from the firm’s IP litigation practice.

The pending Supreme Court case of Impression Products v. Lexmark International could affect what companies and consumers do with products they buy, based on the doctrine of patent exhaustion.  Following oral argument on March 21, three attorneys from Ropes & Gray’s intellectual property practices discuss the background of the case and potential consequences.  Hear commentary from Megan Baca, a partner in IP transactions, and Matt Rizzolo and Henry Huang from the firm’s IP litigation practice.

What impact is the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands, the cheerleader costume case, likely to have on the protectability of the creative elements of clothing and other useful articles? Doug Hallward-Driemeier, who leads Ropes & Gray’s Appellate & Supreme Court practice, along with Evan Gourvitz from the firm’s Intellectual Property Litigation practice, offer their perspectives on the case and what it may mean for the future copyright protection of fashion and industrial design.

What impact is the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands, the cheerleader costume case, likely to have on the protectability of the creative elements of clothing and other useful articles?  Doug Hallward-Driemeier, who leads Ropes & Gray’s Appellate & Supreme Court practice, along with Evan Gourvitz from the firm’s Intellectual Property Litigation practice, offer their perspectives on the case and what it may mean for the future copyright protection of fashion and industrial design.