Courthouse Steps: Samsung v. Apple: Design Patents at the Supreme Court

01/18/17 • 58 min

The Federalist Society will host a one hour Teleforum to discuss the recent Supreme Court decision in Samsung v. Apple--a rare Supreme Court design patent case regarding the shape of the face and grid of icons in Apple's iPhones. Trevor Copeland of Brinks Gilson & Lione, Austin and Art Gollwitzer of Michael Best, Chicago will engage over the specific statutory and policy issues in the decision. Prof. Ryan Holte of SIU School of Law will moderate. -- Featuring: Mr. Trevor Copeland, Shareholder, Brinks Gilson & Lione and Mr. Art Gollwitzer, Partner, Michael Best & Friedrich LLP. Moderator: Prof. Ryan Holte, Assistant Professor of Law, SIU School of Law.

Previous Episode

Business and the Roberts Court

In recent years, the Supreme Court appears to have taken a greater interest in "business" issues. Does this reflect a change in the Court's orientation, or is it the natural outcome of the appellate process? Is the Court "pro-business"? If so, in what ways do the Court's decisions support business interests and what does that mean for the law and the American public? Business and the Roberts Court provides the first critical analysis of the Court's business-related jurisprudence. Author and Editor Jonathan Adler joined us along with two chapter authors, Brian Fitzpatrick and Richard Lazarus, to discuss their contributions to this important volume. -- Featuring: Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law; Director, Center for Business Law and Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law; Prof. Brian T. Fitzpatrick , Professor of Law, Vanderbilt University Law School; and Prof. Richard J. Lazarus, Howard and Katherine Aibel Professor of Law, Harvard Law School.

Next Episode

State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. U.S. ex rel. Rigsby Decided

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court upheld the U.S. Court of Appeals ruling in favor of the respondent. The respondent, Cori Rigsby, violated the seal requirement of the False Claims Act (FCA) by disclosing her complaint against State Farm, regarding allegedly fraudulent actions taken post-Katrina, before the defendant was served. State Farm argued that the case should have been immediately dismissed due to the procedural violation. The question at hand was whether a claim made under the FCA should be dismissed because the complaining party violated the seal requirement. -- Mr. Lawrence Ebner, founder of Capital Appellate Advocacy, author of multiple pieces on the case, and Counsel of Record on the DRI Amicus Brief in support of the petitioner, joined us to discuss the decision and its implications for the future. -- Featuring: Mr. Lawrence Ebner, Founder, Capital Appellate Advocacy.