OA107: Adnan Syed Obviously Did It (Also: You Can Learn About Patents!)

Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments Media LLC

Law, Opinion, Politics, News, Liberal, Legal, Supremecourt, Harvard, Atheist

4.3 • 3.7K Ratings

🗓️ 26 September 2017

⏱️ 86 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Today's super-sized show -- at long last! -- discusses season 1 of the Serial podcast. Even if you haven't heard Serial, we think you'll enjoy this application of the principles of reasonable doubt. We begin with a discussion of the recent settlement between Evergreen College and Bret Weinstein. Why does Andrew say this means the college valued Weinstein's alleged $3.8 million lawsuit at zero? In the main segment, Andrew goes through some of the issues behind the Serial and Undisclosed podcasts related to the Adnan Syed case. Next, Andrew does a mini-deep dive on patent law by looking at a strange recent deal between Allergan and the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe. What in the world do these two entities have in common? Listen and find out! Finally, we end with the answer to Thomas Take the Bar Exam Question #42 regarding authentication of evidence. Don't forget to following our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE! Recent Appearances Andrew was a guest on Episode 11 of the Reasonable Risk podcast; go check it out! Show Notes & Links

Andrew quoted extensively from State v. Earp, 319 Md. 156, 170-172 (1990) on witness coaching.
This is Allergan's press release regarding their deal to sell the patents to the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe.
The two relevant sections from the U.S. Code relating to inter partes review are 35 USC § 102 (“no prior art”) and 35 USC § 103 (“non-obvious”).
This IP website has a brief discussion of the Oil States v. Greene's Energy Group case in which the Supreme Court will consider whether the inter partes review process is constitutional.
The two recent patent cases discussed in the "C" segment are Covidien, LP v. University of Florida Research Foundation, Inc. (Jan. 25, 2017) and NeoChord v. University of Maryland, Baltimore (May 23, 2017).
For a refresher on sovereign immunity, you might want to check out Opening Arguments Episode #90.
Finally, don't forget to check out and join the Opening Arguments Facebook Community!

Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Is that why you hit your wife with drawn?
0:06.4	Is that why you drink and pop pills with drawn?
0:09.2	Are you a virgin with drawn?
0:12.2	That's here you are.
0:22.6	Rob the hospital.
0:23.6	How'd you do that?
0:24.6	Yeah, I'm not guilty.
0:26.6	That's not what the other lawyer said.
0:28.6	Actually, I was going to stay in my office tonight and work on my love lock.
0:35.8	Of course, the Bob-Lob-Lob-Lob-Lob-Lob-Lob.
0:38.8	Wow, you sir are a mouthful.
0:47.4	The jury is instructed to disregard its own testimony.
0:50.4	Your honor, the prosecution rest.
0:53.4	Welcome to opening arguments.
0:58.0	Hello, and welcome to Opening.
1:21.4	This is episode 107.
1:22.8	I'm your host Thomas Smith.
1:23.8	That over there is your other host Andrew Torres.
1:25.7	How are you doing today, Andrew?
1:27.0	I am fantastic.
1:28.3	I have been waiting for the opportunity to do this episode.
1:32.0	I'm glad we're gonna chance to do it today.
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Opening Arguments Media LLC, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Opening Arguments Media LLC and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.