The New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA) filed an amicus brief last Thursday in the U.S. Supreme Court in In re Grand Jury. The petition was filed in April this year, presenting the Supreme Court with the question of whether communication involving both legal and non-legal advice should be protected by attorney-client privilege. The question has broad implications for attorney-client privileges, especially for intellectual property lawyers, says the NYIPLA brief. NYIPLA makes the case that the Supreme Court should adopt “a rule which protects a dual-purpose communication if a significant purpose of the communication is to obtain or provide legal advice.” Currently, the appeals courts are divided as to whether this rule should be adopted versus one that protects communications only if legal advice was the dominant purpose behind the communication.
Recent Posts
- Amici Urge SCOTUS to Scrap Fourth Circuit Approach to Disgorgement of Non-Party Affiliates’ Profits
- Patently Strategic Podcast: Continuation Practice
- GoPro Bid to Invalidate POV Camera Claims as Abstract Shut Down by CAFC
- Wi-Fi 7: Patent Opportunities and the Impact on Intellectual Property in the Technology Sector
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, September 6: House Version of PERA Introduced; Judicial Council Confirms Extension of Newman Suspension; OpenAI Asks Court to Dismiss Claims and Focus on Fair Use in Copyright Battle