Topic
Injunction
719 published works
Nearly Legal: Housing Law News and Comment
The King crossed the threshold – forced entry injunctions
By Giles Peaker
Taylor Clark Ltd v Mohamed (unreported, Central London County Court, 5 March 2026) (note of case here via Falcon Chambers) This was a count court hearing, before DJ Le Bas,…
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
SAD Scheme Copyright Plaintiff Must Compensate Defendants–Shenzhen Langmi v. Schedule A Defendants
By Eric Goldman
Shenzhen Langmi Technology is a Chinese-based vendor of cosmetics and hair products. It claims that the defendants used its copyrights as part of their products. Initially, it sued 36 defendants,…
Truth on the Market
Putting the Bite Back in Patents
By Alden Abbott
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) Feb. 27 joint statement of interest in Collision Communications v. Samsung signals a possible shift back toward…
Patent Law Weblog
USPTO and DOJ Statement of Interest in Collision Communications: Another Thumb on the Scale in Favor of NPE Patent Plaintiffs
By Joshua Rich – On February 27, 2026, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice filed a “Statement of Interest” in Collision…
India Corporate Law
Decoding Delhi High Court’s Ruling: The inter-relationship of injunctive relief and patent validity challenges
The Delhi High Court decided an important case on patent law in Novo Nordisk A/S v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd. The dispute involved Semaglutide, a widely used drug for diabetes…
Legal Futures Blog
Judge can grant injunction to protect party’s lawyers from abuse
By Neil Rose
The High Court was wrong to rule that it did not have jurisdiction to grant claimants a protective injunction stopping a defendant from harassing their lawyers, the Court of Appeal…
Harness Dickey Blog
Stopping Patent Infringement in Court
Patent owners who prevail in court proving that a competitor infringes their patent are, at minimum, entitled to an award of monetary damages.[1] By law, those damages must be at…
Conflict of Laws .net
Richard Fentiman’s Lecture on Contactless Injunctions in English Law
By Ivana Kunda
Richard Fentiman will be speaking on “Contactless Injunctions: New Approaches to Jurisdiction in English Law” at the forthcomming virtual workshop in the Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private…
China Law Insight
美国法院拒绝就专利审判和上诉委员会（PTAB）的裁决提供强制令救济，美国专利诉讼预计将增加
By King & Wood
作者：Michael S. DeVincenzo, Charles Wizenfeld, Andrea Pacelli, 李钊成 双方复审（inter partes review，IPR）是由美国专利审判和上诉委员会（PTAB）管理的一种专利授权后程序，用于审查已授权的美国专利的可专利性。根据美国法典第35编第314(d)条，是否启动IPR复审程序的决定权属于美国专利商标局（USPTO）局长的自由裁量权，且该决定是最终决定，不可上诉，从而限制了司法监督。2022年，USPTO发布了临时性的Fintiv/Sotera指南，指示PTAB：如果申请人提交了一份承诺书，同意不在联邦地区法院提起任何可在IPR复审程序中提出的专利无效理由，则PTAB 通常不应仅因存在平行的地区法院诉讼而拒绝启动 IPR复审程序。此后，在唐纳德·特朗普当选总统以及 USPTO 领导层变动之后，USPTO引入了新的自由裁量性驳回程序，根据该程序，局长扩大了自由裁量性驳回的范围，并加强了对启动IPR复审程序决定的集中控制，即由其本人亲自评估启动程序的各项因素，并可基于其自由裁量选择拒绝启动程序。 阅读更多
China Law Insight
Evenflo IP Ruling Shows Evidence is Still Key for Injunctions
By King & Wood
Authored by: Charles Wizenfeld , Michael S. DeVincenzo and Andrea Pacelli For nearly two decades, permanent injunctions in patent cases have been governed by the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in…