18 Cited authorities

  1. Gunn v. Minton

    568 U.S. 251 (2013)   Cited 1,433 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding insubstantial the federal question whether patent lawyers being sued for malpractice could have succeeded in a prior federal patent suit by timely raising a particular argument, because "[n]o matter how the state courts resolve that hypothetical ‘case within a case,’ it w[ould] not change the real-world result of the prior federal patent litigation. [Plaintiff's] patent w[ould] remain invalid."
  2. Blonder-Tongue v. University Foundation

    402 U.S. 313 (1971)   Cited 2,075 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding issue preclusion inappropriate when "without fault of his own the [party to be precluded] was deprived of crucial evidence or witnesses in the first litigation"
  3. California v. Arc America Corp.

    490 U.S. 93 (1989)   Cited 457 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Sherman Act, which does not allow indirect purchaser actions, does not preempt state laws that allow indirect purchasers to obtain relief
  4. Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Actavis, Inc.

    570 U.S. 136 (2013)   Cited 211 times   69 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "reverse payment settlements . . . can sometimes violate the antitrust laws"
  5. Lear, Inc. v. Adkins

    395 U.S. 653 (1969)   Cited 473 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the licensee is "permitted to avoid the payment of all royalties" if it can prove patent invalidity
  6. In re Tamoxifen Citrate Antitrust Litigation

    466 F.3d 187 (2d Cir. 2005)   Cited 199 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding "where amendment would be futile, denial of leave to amend is proper"
  7. United States v. Singer Mfg. Co.

    374 U.S. 174 (1963)   Cited 160 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that settlement agreements between the Singer Company and its Italian and Swiss competitors violated the Sherman Act
  8. Hunter v. Charmaine

    142 Cal.App.4th 1497 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 133 times
    In Hunter S., an appeal from an order terminating parental rights and denying a section 388 petition, the five-year-old minor was detained and placed with a grandmother while the mother was incarcerated.
  9. Roth v. Rhodes

    25 Cal.App.4th 530 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994)   Cited 118 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a speculative relationship does not satisfy the existing relationship prong
  10. In re Swanson

    540 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2008)   Cited 53 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Describing “Congress' purpose of allowing for a reexamination procedure to correct examiner errors”
  11. Rule 8.204 - Contents and format of briefs

    Cal. R. 8.204   Cited 2,659 times

    (a) Contents (1) Each brief must: (A) Begin with a table of contents and a table of authorities separately listing cases, constitutions, statutes, court rules, and other authorities cited; (B) State each point under a separate heading or subheading summarizing the point, and support each point by argument and, if possible, by citation of authority; and (C) Support any reference to a matter in the record by a citation to the volume and page number of the record where the matter appears. If any part