Here are the Commercial Appeals Roundups for the weeks of April 20-24, 2020 and April 27-May 1, 2020. The Roundups describe a key aspect of precedential appellate rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, the 13 U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the highest appeals courts in Delaware, New York, and Texas and provide links directly to the relevant court’s opinion.

Week of April 20

Extension of drug patent term didn’t apply to inactive variation of active ingredient.

Beating patent claim on mootness grounds made defendant prevailing party that could get fee award.

Tsunami case against GE belonged in Japan.

Averaging could doom class cert in pay-for-delay antitrust case.

You can’t sue a dead person.

Company founded by assignor of three patents couldn’t contest validity of two in suit by assignee but could defeat third patent via IPR that resulted in invalidation.

Drug seller lacked standing to appeal loss in IPR attack on patentability of drug it didn’t yet and might never make.

Patent on method for fishing claimed abstract idea.

Week of April 27

Privilege didn’t protect names of tax law firm’s clients.

Instruction in jury charge mooted question that required antitrust plaintiff to prove competitors’ pact allocated both customers and territories.

Deep-sixing of database accused of copyright infringement supported verdict against new company set up by founder of copyright owner.

Fraud verdict adequately compensated lender for reliance on faulty appraisal of Las Vegas Lakes project.

Disclaimer of reliance didn’t bar Texas jury’s fraudulent inducement finding under New York law.

Sanctions against lawyer require proof of bad faith.

Award of profits for trademark infringement doesn‘t depend on finding of willfulness.

Conflict of laws rules overrode choice of law in contract.

Law firms’ advance split of contingent fee didn’t track actual work, had to give way.

Objective test governs sham-lawsuit exception to immunity under first amendment protection for petitioning activity.

“Breezy” class cert ruling in ERISA case didn’t have enough “rigor”.

Daubert barred class expert in case over design defect.

Hope of someday selling goods in U.S. didn’t provide basis for jurisdiction to contest U.S. trademark rights.

“Lawful possessor” of trade secrets may sue for their misappropriation.

Communication system patent covered more than an unpatentable abstract idea.

Too-narrow claim construction in IPR required second look at obviousness on remand.

Arbitrators could change ”Partial Final Award”.

Payment of unlawful import fee by ocean freight carriers didn’t confer standing to sue on shippers.

Federal court may have diversity jurisdiction over petition to enforce arbitrators’ subpoena against non-parties to arbitration even if it wouldn’t have diversity jurisdiction over case between parties.

FAA allows courts to enforce arbitrators’ subpoenas that call for production at “a hearing” before arbitrators.

Court may defer rulings on objections to subpoena for documents to arbitrators.

Bud Light ads can say Molson Coors makes Coors Light with corn syrup.

Copyright law doesn’t protect state legal code.

Note for readers

Because my practice focuses on complex commercial disputes–especially antitrust, energy, and intellectual property–I keep daily track of important decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court, the 13 U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the highest appeals courts in Delaware, New York, and Texas.

You can follow along during the week on Twitter (@contingencyblog) or here at The Contingency each Monday with this Commercial Appeals Roundup.

Check out my profile on the Susman Godfrey website.