Close X

Attorney Spotlight

How does Eli Richardson's past work with the federal government inform his client interactions? Find out more>

Search

Close X

Experience

Search our Experience

Experience Spotlight

In June 2016, AmSurg Corp. and Envision Healthcare Holdings, Inc. (Envision) announced they have signed a definitive merger agreement pursuant to which the companies will combine in an all-stock transaction. Upon completion of the merger, which is expected to be tax-free to the shareholders of both organizations, the combined company will be named Envision Healthcare Corporation and co-headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee and Greenwood Village, Colorado. The company's common stock is expected to trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol: EVHC. Bass, Berry & Sims served as lead counsel on the transaction, led by Jim Jenkins. Read more.

AmSurg logo


Close X

Thought Leadership

Enter your search terms in the relevant box(es) below to search for specific Thought Leadership.
To see a recent listing of Thought Leadership, click the blue Search button below.

Thought Leadership Spotlight

Inside the FCA blogInside the FCA blog features ongoing updates related to the False Claims Act (FCA), including insight on the latest legal decisions, regulatory developments and FCA settlements. The blog provides timely updates for corporate boards, directors, compliance managers, general counsel and other parties interested in the organizational impact and legal developments stemming from issues potentially giving rise to FCA liability.

Read More >

Senator Leahy Leaves Patent Trolls Under the Bridge

Publications

May 22, 2014

Stakeholders in patent litigation experienced mixed emotions yesterday, as Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy announced that he was removing his Patent Transparency and Improvements Act from the committee's agenda. For several months now, anti-patent-troll reform has been at the top of most state and federal legislative priorities.1 So far, 12 states—including Tennessee—have passed anti-patent-troll laws, with similar laws under consideration in at least 14 other states. However, Congress has not yet reached a consensus on how best to identify "a troll" and, once found, what to do about it. As is often the case, the devil is proving to be in the details. Notwithstanding considerable pressure for action, Senator Leahy sensed a lack of bipartisan support as many stakeholders expressed significant concerns about unintended consequences of the pending federal legislation.

Senator Leahy's committee was also considering Representative Bob Goodlatte's Innovation Act, which passed the U.S. House of Representatives with broad bipartisan support in December 2013.2 Most observers expected that the two bills would be merged through a conference committee.

The various federal legislative proposals this session in both chambers of Congress have addressed pleading standards, attorneys' fees, joinder, pre-Markman discovery, electronic discovery, bad faith demand letters, transparency of patent ownership, stays of customer suits pending resolution of manufacturer suits, and other topics. Some stakeholders were concerned that the demand letter provisions would expose legitimate businesses to increased litigation and liability for taking the routine and prudent step of sending a demand letter before filing a complaint. Another controversial provision related to the presumptions and burdens for attorneys' fees in patent litigation. The need for such fee-shifting legislation, however, may have been tempered by the U.S. Supreme Court's recent rulings in Octane Fitness3 and Highmark,4 which we discussed in a previous Alert.5  In those cases, the High Court eased the standard for district courts to award attorneys' fees in patent litigation and increased the appellate deference to district court fee awards.

Although the Senate may yet revive one or more patent reform bills, yesterday's announcement most likely sounded the death knell for all patent reform efforts in this legislative session. In light of the risk of unintended consequences, especially to universities, small businesses, and individual inventors, many stakeholders support further Congressional debate on patent reform. In the absence of meaningful reform, however, patent infringement filings and costs likely will continue to trend upward.

We will continue to provide updates on patent reform efforts in all three branches of the federal government and in the state governments, as they develop. If you have any questions about the content of this alert, please contact one of the authors listed above or any member of our Intellectual Property and Technology team.


Related Professionals

Related Services

Notice

Visiting, or interacting with, this website does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Although we are always interested in hearing from visitors to our website, we cannot accept representation on a new matter from either existing clients or new clients until we know that we do not have a conflict of interest that would prevent us from doing so. Therefore, please do not send us any information about any new matter that may involve a potential legal representation until we have confirmed that a conflict of interest does not exist and we have expressly agreed in writing to the representation. Until there is such an agreement, we will not be deemed to have given you any advice, any information you send may not be deemed privileged and confidential, and we may be able to represent adverse parties.