1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |PODCAST: Announcing Crowell & Moring’s Regulatory Forecast 2017 and Trump: The First Year Series — C&M's Trump: The First Year Series

PODCAST: Announcing Crowell & Moring’s Regulatory Forecast 2017 and Trump: The First Year Series — C&M's Trump: The First Year Series

Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.11.17

On May 9, Crowell & Moring launched its third annual Regulatory Forecast. The 2017 edition, subtitled “What Trump Means for Business,” provides in-depth analysis on how the new administration, Congress, and the federal courts are changing the regulatory landscape and what it means for business in the months ahead. With this publication, we are also announcing the launch of our new Trump: The First Year series about the regulatory changes emerging from the White House under the new administration. In this first episode of the series, Regulatory Forecast co-editors Dan Wolff and Richard Lehfeldt sit down to discuss the Forecast and what to expect from the series.

In this 12 minute podcast, Richard and Dan discuss what you will find in our Regulatory Forecast 2017 and what lessons businesses should take from the publication. The forecast is available at crowell.com/regulatoryforecast.

Click below to listen or access from one of these links:
PodBean | SoundCloud | iTunes

Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25

Defining Claim Terms by Implication: Lexicography Lessons from Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation

Claim construction is a key stage of most patent litigations, where the court must decide the meaning of any disputed terms in the patent claims.  Generally, claim terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning except under two circumstances: (1) when the patentee acts as its own lexicographer and sets out a definition for the term; and (2) when the patentee disavows the full scope of the term either in the specification or during prosecution.  Thorner v. Sony Comput. Ent. Am. LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012).  The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp. highlights that patentees can act as their own lexicographers through consistent, interchangeable usage of terms across the specification, effectively defining terms by implication....