To obtain Social Security disability benefits, an applicant must first establish that he has a disability. But he can be denied benefits if the Social Security Administration determines that there is work that he can do despite the disability. (See here for a more detailed explanation.) In Biestek v. Berryhill, argued on December 4, the … Continue reading Oral Argument: Disability Benefits and Patents
The Court will kick off this week by hearing oral arguments in Bethune-Hill v. Virginia Board of Elections on Monday. After the Virginia General Assembly redrew its legislative districts, the plaintiffs sued, alleging that race was a predominant factor in the redistricting. The Court will have to decide if Virginia’s political leaders unconstitutionally gerrymandered the … Continue reading The Week Ahead – December 5, 2016
On October 15, 2014, the Supreme Court hears oral argument in Teva Pharmaceuticals v. Sandoz, a pharmaceutical patent case that could clarify critical issues of claim construction in patent litigation as well as the relative power of trial courts and appellate courts in such matters. Professor David Schwartz (IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law) discusses the background of the case and the central issue: What is the proper standard of review that the appellate court should use to review claim constructions of a patent done by trial courts?
Today, the Supreme Court ruled in ABC v. Aereo that Aereo’s service infringes on the copyrights of the broadcasters. Professor Edward Lee (IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law) explains the details of the ruling and the unusual lineup of Justices in the majority.
This week, the Supreme Court heard arguments on two important patent cases: Limelight v. Akamai and Nautilus v. Biosig. In addition to this week’s video from Professor David Schwartz on these cases, the Chicago-Kent Faculty Blog has argument analysis and predictions on these two cases. The analyses are written by Professor Christi Guerrini, and the … Continue reading Patent Cases Before the Court
On April 28, 2014, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., and two days later, the Court heard argument in Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc. These two patent cases have important implications for intellectual property law. Professor David Schwartz (IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law) explains the issues and background of both cases.
On April 22, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in an important copyright case involving Aereo, an Internet TV service from Brooklyn that has the financial backing of media mogul Barry Diller. The case has received a lot of media attention because it pits a disruptive Internet startup against the old-line broadcast TV networks. But … Continue reading The Aereo Case – and Prediction
Today, the Supreme Court hears oral argument in American Broadcasting Company, Inc. v. Aereo. Professor Edward Lee of IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law explains why Aereo’s system is a problem for the broadcasters and what the issues are in this case.
Last week, ISCOTUS was a sponsor of Chicago-Kent College of Law’s Supreme Court Intellectual Property Review (SCIPR), which highlighted intellectual property cases before the Supreme Court last Term and discussed implications for the coming Term. ISCOTUSnow presents a summary from each session of the conference, with help from Daniel Saunders of the Chicago-Kent faculty blog.
The 2012 Term of the Supreme Court wrapped up with many important decisions. The faculty of Chicago-Kent College of Law goes behind the decisions to explain what happened, why, and what it means for the future.
Continue reading Behind the Decisions of 2012