Veronika Rychlá

This case centers on the patentability and legal protection of biotechnological innovations, specifically engineered antibodies that help reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. The core legal principle involves the standards for patent validity in the context of biopharmaceuticals, focusing on the balance between innovation protection and public access to medical advancements.

The case established that State National Guards, when hiring and supervising dual-status technicians in their civilian role, act as federal agencies for purposes of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (FSLMRS). Thus, they are subject to the FLRA's jurisdiction over labor disputes. Introduction: This case addresses a significant question regarding

This case centers around the scope of the IRS's power to issue summonses without notice in aid of tax collection, specifically addressing whether such summonses require a delinquent taxpayer to have a legal interest in the summoned records. Introduction: Polselli et al. v. Internal Revenue Service is a significant Supreme

This case clarifies that the exhaustion requirement under 8 U.S.C. §1252(d)(1) is not jurisdictional and does not compel noncitizens to seek discretionary forms of review, like reconsideration from the Board of Immigration Appeals, before seeking judicial review. The Supreme Court held that the exhaustion requirement in

This case examined the constitutionality of California's Proposition 12, which set welfare standards for breeding pigs and barred the sale of pork products not meeting these standards. The key legal principle involved was whether this state law violated the dormant Commerce Clause by unduly burdening interstate commerce. Introduction: National Pork

This Supreme Court case revolves around the issue of sovereign immunity in the context of the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico, established under the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA). The key legal principle established is that statutory language must be unmistakably clear in

This case examines whether a private citizen with significant influence over government decision-making can be convicted of honest-services wire fraud. The key legal principle established is the clarification of the scope and applicability of honest-services fraud, particularly regarding private individuals who exert substantial influence over public officials or governmental decisions.

This case revolves around the invalidity of the "right-to-control" theory under federal fraud statutes. The Supreme Court held that the right to valuable economic information needed to make discretionary economic decisions is not a traditional property interest, and thus, cannot form the basis for a conviction under federal fraud statutes.

This case clarifies that Section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code, which concerns the validity of a sale or lease of property in a bankruptcy context, is not a jurisdictional provision. This means that the provision does not limit the court's power to hear a case but rather governs the

This case addressed whether the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) grants immunity to foreign state-owned entities in U.S. criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court held that the FSIA, which primarily governs civil cases against foreign states, does not extend to criminal cases. This key doctrine establishes that foreign entities, like