Building Legal Research Capacity using the Open Web

1,489 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Building Legal Research Capacity using the Open Web

  1. 1. Building Legal Research Capacity using the Open Web The Day You Lose Access to Premium Services : Toolkit Building ©2016 Jon R. Cavicchi, Professor & IP Librarian
  2. 2. Your Goal = Assemble a Toolkit to meet your professional needs…
  3. 3. • Dedicated IP sites – Open web – Semi open web • Dedicated General Law Sites – Capture IP content • Non-Legal Interdisciplinary Sites – Sprectrum from pure news to high scholarship – Capture IP content
  4. 4. Develop your own information seeking behavior…. • Focus on IP but works with most other areas of law • Change is constant…tomorrow and site may be gone • Info social networking key • Become a junk mail junkie
  5. 5. • Law Firms • Corporations • Government • Universities • NGO • Solutions Providers • Public Policy • Consultancies
  6. 6. Topics Lawyers Researching Using Internet Services 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 generalnews(77.8%) lawyers(72.9%) companies(66.8%) legalnews(65.2%) publicrecords(62.1%) experts(41.3%) judges(39.9%) casedockets(38.2%) state administrative(36.8%) state legislation(35.9%) federal administrative(30.6%) otherstate legislation(29.6%) federal legislation(28.8%) otherstate administrative(27.6%) legalforms(25.4%) otherstatecase law(22.9%) statecase law(22.8%) federalcase law(15%) legalCitators(11.3%) Topics <2008 Legal Technology Survey Report by ABA> Percentage(%) Series1 How U.S. legal professionals use the Open Web
  7. 7. Grad Program Alum Survey
  8. 8. Lots of Premium $ervices give free news
  9. 9. How do I choose?
  10. 10. Law Firm Positions • Lawyer • Technical Specialist • IP analyst • IP Informatics • Paraprofessionals
  11. 11. Law Firm Areas of Practice • Prosecution • Litigation • Transactional • Business aspects
  12. 12. Anatomy of a Patent Case Chapter 2: The Complaint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Chapter 3: Motions to Dismiss, to Transfer, to Strike . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Chapter 4: Answer and Counterclaims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Chapter 5: Preliminary Injunction Motions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Chapter 6: The Case-Management Conference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Chapter 7: Discovery Issues Unique to Patent Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Chapter 8: Claim Construction—The Markman Hearing . . . . . . . . 71 Chapter 9: Summary Judgment Motions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Chapter 10: Pretrial Issues and Motions In Limine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Chapter 11: Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Chapter 12: Posttrial Proceedings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 Chapter 13: The Appeal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 Chapter 14: Trial of a Patent Case in Canada. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
  13. 13. For litigation example • Primary sources of law • Secondary sources of law • Fact finding • Public records including patent, TM and © • Knowledge management • Continuing Searches
  14. 14. Try to create a Lexis/Westlaw “one stop shop” Try to create a Lexis/Westlaw “one stop shop”
  15. 15. Strategies too keep up to date • Develop portfolio of needs • Examine your information seeking behavior • Determines sites and tools that meet needs • Determine options to harvest information
  16. 16. News • IP news sites • IP sites with news sections • IP sites with email news delivery • IP sites with RSS enabled pages • Search sites with alerts • Social Networking – Blogs – Listservs – Newsgroups – Linkedin Groups – Twitter Following – Facebook – Social Bookmarking
  17. 17. What's an RSS Feed? • RSS stands for Really Simple Syndication. • RSS feeds are a way for websites to distribute new content as it becomes available. • Think of an RSS feed as a file that contains a blog or website's most recent entries. • By subscribing to a site's feed in Reader, you will automatically be notified when that website contains new posts or entries. • Instead of checking sites repeatedly for updates, RSS feeds bring your favorite websites to you!
  18. 18. Google Reader in Plain English
  19. 19. Feed news sources to Twitter
  20. 20. • Web pages • Email newsletters • Listservs • Newsgroups • Harvestable PDF newsletters • Technologies = RSS Feeds • Social media – Twitter – LinkedIn – Facebook – Social bookmarking – YouTube
  21. 21. Newsgroups
  22. 22. Professional Organizations
  23. 23. Law FirmsNews Articles Webinars Social tools & content News Articles Webinars Social tools & content
  24. 24. Law Schools Intellectual Property Akron, University of, LL.M. Albany Law School, LL.M. Boston University, LL.M. Case Western Reserve University, LL.M. Chicago-Kent College of Law, LL.M. Dayton, University of, LL.M.; M.S.L. DePaul University, LL.M. Drake University, LL.M.; M.J. Fordham University, LL.M. George Mason University, LL.M. George Washington University, LL.M. Golden Gate University, LL.M. Houston, University of, LL.M. Indiana University-Indianapolis, LL.M. John Marshall Law School (Chicago), LL.M.; M.S. Michigan State University College of Law LL.M.; M.J. New Hampshire, University of, LL.M. San Francisco, University of, LL.M. Santa Clara University, LL.M. Seton Hall University, LL.M. Thomas M. Cooley Law School, LL.M. Washington, University of, LL.M. Washington University, LL.M. Yeshiva University, LL.M.
  25. 25. Solutions Providers
  26. 26. Trade Associations
  27. 27. Legal Research Primary and Secondary Sources
  28. 28. Mandatory or Persuasive? Example: Cases • Determining when a court's decision is mandatory or persuasive can be tricky, given the multiple jurisdictions throughout the country and the layers of courts within each jurisdiction. • Our court systems are founded on the belief that there should be fairness, consistency, and predictability in judicial decision making. The doctrine that expresses this concept is labeled stare decisis. • In essence, stare decisis considers mandatory, or binding, an existing decision from any court that exercises appellate jurisdiction over another court, unless the lower court can show that the decision is clearly wrong or is distinguishable from the case at hand.
  29. 29. • When Decisions Are Mandatory – Whether a decision of a particular court is mandatory, whether it must be followed by another court, depends on the source of the decision. As a general rule, the decisions of a court will be mandatory authority for any court lower in the hierarchy. Decisions from a court lower than the one in question are never mandatory. • Federal Courts – United States Supreme Court--The decisions of the United States Supreme Court are mandatory authority in all courts, federal and state, when the decisions cover points of federal law. – United States courts of appeals--Decisions of the U.S. courts of appeals are mandatory on district courts and other lower courts within the circuit. Court of appeals decisions are persuasive authority in the other circuits, both for other courts of appeals and for lower courts. Federal courts of appeals decisions are not binding on state courts. – United States district courts--The decisions of U.S. district courts are mandatory on specialized lower courts if within the appellate jurisdiction of the district court (i.e., bankruptcy, territorial courts, etc.). District court decisions are not binding on state courts.
  30. 30. • 1. identical legal issues • 2. substantially similar material legal facts • 3. mandatory precedent • But 'citation of the case in point [is] by no means the last word'. • As Karl Llewellyn wrote, 'There is no precedent that the judge may not at his need either file down to razor thinness or expand into a bludgeon'. • For example, the judge may 'explain' the case, 'limit it to its facts', or somehow 'distinguish' it from your case. So, where you or your client's opponent cites a governing precedent, see if you can 'file down the case to thinness.
  31. 31. Lexis & Westlaw • Cases • Statutes • Regulations • Administrative Decisions • Procedural Manuals • Legal Dictionaries – Words & Phrases • Legal Encyclopedias • Annotated Law Reports • Legal Periodicals • Legal Treatises, Hornbooks & Nutshells • Restatements • Loose Leaf Services • Legal Directories.
  32. 32. Open Web & Secondary Sources Proprietary sources NOT on the Open Web
  33. 33. Secondary Sources on the Web • Public domain treatises – Including governments and some NGO • Pirated treatises • Selective law reviews • Web pages • Newsletters • Blogs
  34. 34. Lexis and Westlaw LITE
  35. 35. What do you lose with LITE sites? • Editorial enhancements • Validation services (e.g. Keycite and Shepards) • One search natural language boxes • Robust terms and connectors • Value added services (e.g. Folders, Custom Menus, alerts, copy with citation… ) • Secondary source content • Public records content • Premium news content
  36. 36. Treatises • Websites To Download Free EBooks Google Advanced Search set to PDF can find treatises Google Advanced Search set to PDF can find treatises
  37. 37. Document Repositories
  38. 38. Legal Scholarship Repositories Legal Scholarship not in any other database/site Legal Scholarship not in any other database/site
  39. 39. Law Reviews via Google Scholar
  40. 40. Open Web Court Decisions • Megasites • Boutique sites • News sites • Social media • Court by Court • No federated search • But see Google Scholar – scope is limited
  41. 41. Open Web : Docket Tracking • NGO sites • Court by court
  42. 42. Open Web Administrative Decisions • Board of Patent Appeals & Interferences • Trademark Trial and Appeals Board • Copyright Appeals Letters • Copyright Royalty Tribunal Opinions
  43. 43. Open Web Federal Statutes • Megasites • Boutique sites • News sites • Social media • Government sites • Agency sites link out
  44. 44. Legislation & Legislative History
  45. 45. • Megasites • Boutique sites • News sites • Social media • Government sites – Agency sites link out… Open Web Regulations
  46. 46. Open Web Procedural Manuals • Manual of Patent Examination Procedures • Trademark Manual of Examination Procedures • Trademark Trial and Appeals Board Manual • Compendium III: Copyright Office Practices
  47. 47. Open Web Legal Periodicals • ABA Portal • Visit each school • Google Scholar • Legal Scholars Network
  48. 48. Open Web : law firm newsletters
  49. 49. Web 2.0 & Social Networking • Blogs • Wikis • Twitter • LinkedIn • Facebook • Social bookmarking
  50. 50. Blogs
  51. 51. There’s an app for that…
  52. 52. Exercise: How does each Google product serve an IP professional?
  53. 53. Foreign & International Law
  54. 54. • Directory of Intellectual Property Offices • WIPO Lex • WIPO-Administered Treaties • Patent Cooperation Treaty • Trademark Law Treaty • Madrid Protocol • Internet Sources for Intellectual Property Case Law • Agreement on Trade- Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights ("TRIPS") • Berne Convention • Paris Convention • Universal Copyright Convention
  55. 55. Open Web Portals
  56. 56. General Foreign Law Sites You will have to develop you own supplemental lists of foreign law sites You will have to develop you own supplemental lists of foreign law sites
  57. 57. Featured Open Source Featured Open Source
  58. 58. Patent Searching • WIPO • National Offices • Regional Offices • NGOs – Many countries offer these
  59. 59. I. Evaluating Legal Research Tools Coverage Currency Accuracy Value Added Features Authority Appropriateness Cost Perspective Design- Usability
  60. 60. Coverage What is the depth and breath of coverage Does the source provide more than a few years of coverage? Can you search for older cases? In a caselaw database are there missing cases or missing courts? Are there statutes or regulations as well as cases?
  61. 61. Currency Is the information up to date? When was the code last updated? What is the most recent case loaded to the database? What is the revision cycle of the database?
  62. 62. Accuracy Can you identify any missing documents? Does the secondary source provide verifiable information with citations? Are there errors in the documents? Can you verify that the document has not been altered since publication?
  63. 63. Value Added Features – Content & Technology Search Features Search for a known citation (find a document) Search multiple databases (multiple jurisdictions) Table of Contents / Index / Popular Names Table Citator (or a way to search for all cases that cited to a known case or statute or regulation). Sort Features Control how you review results Document Features Headnotes Topics & keynumber Pinpoint Pagination Hyperlinks within document
  64. 64. Technology • One Search (e.g. Westlaw Next) • Natural language • Folders, favorites, practice centers & other organizational tools
  65. 65. Authority Can you identify: the author the qualifications of the author how to contact the publisher / producer verifiable citations to the documentation behind the statements
  66. 66. Other Ways to Evaluate a Source Appropriateness Is it clear who the intended audience is Is the language, illustrations, and format adequate for the audience Perspective What is the goal of the source Is there a bias or is it objective
  67. 67. Develop an analytical approach
  68. 68. In conclusion, change is constant so stay in touch…

×