Inconsistent Judgments on the Breadth of CBM Review?

Guest Post by Jeffrey Berkowitz and Jonathan R.K. Stroud  | If you are looking for clarity on what qualifies as a “Covered Business Method” for review under Section 18 of the AIA (America Invents Act), the PTAB’s (Patent Trial and Appeal Board) decisions offer little guidance. Congress established the PTAB to provide a more effective, efficient, and consistent review of issued patents. But the PTAB has a ways to go as far as consistency is concerned. Continue Reading →

Guest Post: Confidence in Intervals and Diffidence in the Courts

This guest post comes to the STLR Blog from CLS Lecturer-in-Law Nathan A. Schachtman. He blogs regularly at This post was originally published at that site and is available here. Next year, the Supreme Court’s Daubert decision will turn 20.  The decision, in interpreting Federal Rule of Evidence 702, dramatically changed the landscape of expert witness testimony.  Still, there are many who would turn the clock back to disabling the gatekeeping function.  In past posts, I Continue Reading →