Law Firm News

---

Law Firm News

Firm Name

News Title

News

News Date

25383 matches |  6847-6853 displayed

1  976 977 978 979 980  3627

---

Winstead, Sechrest & Minick, P.C.

Winstead Adds Three Attorneys to Real Estate Practice in Houston Office
Texas law firm Winstead PC is welcoming Claude B. Anello, Harry B. Dollar and Nathan Block to the firm’s Houston office. Anello comes to Winstead as an income shareholder, while Dollar and Block join the firm as associates. All three will practice in the Real Estate Development & Investments Practice Group.

“We’re extremely happy to have these three join our ranks,” says Ross Margraves, Managing Shareholder of Winstead’s Houston office. “I know that Claude, Harry and Nathan will be excellent additions to our practice.”

Anello’s experience includes representation of the wireless telecommunications, automotive, health care and lending industries in a variety of real estate and asset-based lending transactions. He is a graduate of the University of Houston Law Center and was named a Texas Rising Star by the editors of Texas Monthly and Law & Politics magazines in 2006 and 2007.

Dollar also has represented the wireless telecommunications industry in real estate transactions related to leases, license agreements and other matters involved in site acquisition for communications facilities. He is a graduate of the South Texas College of Law and is a licensed Texas real estate broker.

Block has a practice that focuses on environmental law, including environmental due diligence, compliance assistance and permitting. He is a graduate of the Texas Tech University School of Law.

04-30-2007

---

Troutman Sanders LLP

Two Associates Join Troutman Sanders' Securities & Corporate Governance Practice Group
Troutman Sanders LLP is pleased to announce the addition of Hank J. Heyming and Shannon VanVleet Patterson as associates to its Securities & Corporate Governance practice group in Richmond, Va.

Heyming comes to Troutman Sanders from the law firm of Williams Mullen in Richmond, Va., where he was an associate from 2006-2007.

Prior to working at Williams Mullen, Heyming worked as an associate for Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP (2004-2005) in Los Angeles and Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP (1999-2004) in Costa Mesa, Ca.

Heyming received a B.A. in 1995 from the University of California, Riverside, and a J.D. in 1999 from Vanderbilt University.

Patterson comes to Troutman Sanders from the law firm of CowanGates, PC in Richmond, Va., where she was an associate from 2004 to 2007.

Patterson received a B.A. in 1999 from the University of Virginia and a J.D. in 2004 from Wake Forest University.

04-30-2007

---

Sughrue Mion PLLC

Supreme Court Issues Decision in KSR Case
The Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in KSR, holding that the Federal Circuit’s teaching-suggestion-motivation (“TSM”) test was applied too restrictively, resulting in an approach to evaluating obviousness that did not embrace the expansive and flexible approaches established by the Supreme Court in Graham or Adams. The decision will be praised by academics and many in the computer and software industries who have criticized the obviousness standard for patentability as too low.

The Supreme Court made clear that “the combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results,” citing its decisions in Adams, Anderson’s Black Rock, and Sakraida. In reaching its decision, the court cited four particular errors of the Federal Circuit in applying the TSM test to Teleflex’s ‘976 patent.

First, the Federal Circuit erred in narrowly focusing on the particular motivation of the patent inventors looking to solve a particular problem, rather than more broadly on the recognition of a known problem for which there was an obvious solution encompassed by the patent’s claims. The Court made clear that any need or problem known in the field of endeavor at the time of invention and addressed by the patent can provide a reason for combining the elements in the manner claimed.

Second, it was error to assume that a person of ordinary skill attempting to solve a problem would be led only to those elements of prior art designed to solve the same problem. According to the Court, “[c]ommon sense teaches, [ ] that familiar items may have obvious uses beyond their primary purposes, and in many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle.”

Third, it was error to conclude that a patent claim cannot be proven obvious merely by showing that the combination of elements was obvious to try. When there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product of ordinary skill and common sense. In that instance, the fact that a combination was obvious to try might show that it was legally obvious under §103.

Finally, the need to protect against hindsight bias and ex post reasoning can not operate to deprive a factfinder of recourse to common sense. Although more recent Federal Circuit decisions have acknowledged the availability of common knowledge and common sense in the TSM calculus, the approach used by the Federal Circuit in this case was too restrictive and thus inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent.

In its decision today, the Court said nothing of a “synergy” requirement as replacement for the TSM test, a concern of many amici who argued that the TSM test was both workable and consistent with Graham. Would-be patentees confronted with a possible synergy hurdle have dodged a bullet. Others worried about whether a test substantively different from TSM would be adopted can breathe a sigh of relief, for the Court announced no new tests for determining whether a patent claim would have been obvious in view of prior art teachings. Rather, the Court set forth a standard that asks “whether the improvement is more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions.” The Court emphasized its own precedent whose flexibility permits the use of common sense and general knowledge, the consideration of teachings beyond the particular field of the inventor’s endeavor in developing the claimed invention, and the uses of familiar items beyond their primary purposes.

Going forward, the obviousness requirement under Section 103 will pose a greater obstacle to patentability than before today’s KSR v. Teleflex decision. But that trend has already begun by the Federal Circuit in its 2006 decisions in Dystar, Khan and Alza. The standards of patentability have been raised, and the days of overcoming a claim of obviousness based on a strict application of the TSM test are long gone.

04-30-2007

---

Saul Ewing, LLP

Berlage and Spar Stress Importance of Business and Science Background
Tanya D. Berlage and Robert A. Spar, Partners in the Business Department and Life Sciences Practice Group, were quoted in this article about how law firms are increasingly seeking attorneys who have professional or scientific experience in the bio-tech and life sciences fields.

Because of the region's growing life science industry, law firms are pursuing attorneys with this type of specialized knowledge.

Ms. Berlage, former vice president of a multinational pharmaceutical company, said, "What I would look for when hiring outside counsel was to have lawyers who understand the industry."

"Science is very exact," Mr. Spar said. "When you go to law school, you learn that it's the exact opposite--there isn't an exact answer, and you argue both sides of an issue.

04-30-2007

---

Rothgerber Johnson & Lyons

RJ&L Partner, Jesús M. Vázquez, Reappointed to Denver Urban Renewal Authority Board of Commissioners for 5-Year Term
Rothgerber Johnson & Lyons LLP is pleased to announce that Jesús M. Vázquez, a partner in the firm, has been reappointed to the Denver Urban Renewal Authority Board of Commissioners for a 5-year term by Mayor John Hickenlooper and unanimously confirmed by the Denver City Council.

The Denver Urban Renewal Authority (DURA) is a full-service redevelopment agency engaged in neighborhood and downtown revitalization, economic development, home ownership and housing rehabilitation throughout the City and County of Denver. DURA functions as a catalyst, partner, advisor and/or participant in a variety of efforts to foster sound growth and development.

Mr. Vázquez' practice with the firm focuses on a variety of complex corporate, business and construction litigation, intellectual property, and international matters, including representation of companies in both federal and state courts. Mr. Vázquez has significant experience in arbitration and mediation proceedings, most often under the auspices of the American Arbitration Association.

Mr. Vázquez is a graduate from the University of Denver College of Law and received an undergraduate degree in Aerospace Engineering from Penn State.

04-30-2007

---

Prince Lobel Glovsky & Tye LLP

Prince Lobel attorneys named "Rising Stars"
Each year, Law & Politics conducts surveys in 10 states to locate "Rising Stars" (exceptional young attorneys). The results are tallied and the Massachusetts listing is reported in a supplement in Boston magazine. We congratulate the following seven individuals that are acknowledged in this year's feature as "Rising Stars":

* Kimberley Keyes
* Kristin Knuuttila
* Peter Kuperstein
* Joshua Lewin
* David Plotkin
* Jeff Pyle
* Amy Serino

How do they find "Rising Stars"?

Law & Politics starts the process by mailing ballots to the most recent group of Super Lawyers: the top 5 percent of attorneys in the state. The point totals from the general survey and research process are then added to arrive at a final tally. The lawyers are ranked by point totals and the list is cut until approximately 2.5 percent of the best up-and-coming attorneys in the state remain. To ensure a diverse and well-balanced list, the research staff considers factors such as firm size, practice area and geographic location.

04-30-2007

---

Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Preston Gates Ellis LLP

Arrival of New York Partner Builds Out K&L Gates’ Finance Practice
Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Preston Gates Ellis LLP (K&L Gates) welcomes Tony Nolan to its finance practice. Nolan comes to the firm from Goodwin Procter LLP.

Nolan’s practice focuses on domestic and cross-border securitization, structured finance and derivatives. He represents issuers, underwriters, servicers, bond insurers and others, and has broad experience in a variety of structured products and asset classes.

Woody Collins, Administrative Partner of K&L Gates’ New York office, said: “Tony’s corporate finance and securities experience is a solid fit for the firm’s clients in New York and other financial centers around the world. We are pleased to welcome him to the practice.”

K&L Gates’ Chairman and Global Managing Partner Peter J. Kalis said: “Our firmwide finance practice has grown dramatically in recent times. Tony's arrival takes it another major step forward as we continue to establish K&L Gates as a global leader in finance law.

04-30-2007

---

25383 matches |  6847-6853 displayed

1  976 977 978 979 980  3627