Contributor's Guide

Welcome to the Report Contributor's Guide!

This guide will provide an overview of your responsibilities as a Contributor of a Digest Report. Reports are short objective overviews, 500-700 words in length, of recent court opinions or pieces of legislation. They also provide links to primary sources and additional commentary for readers who want to dig deeper.

Subject Matter Coordinators (SMCs) are constantly looking for cutting edge developments in law & technology. They will assign the topic to you and an Report Editor. Your job is to write the substantive content of the report while the Report Editor will help you ensure it is publication-ready.

Writing Process in a Nutshell

• Step 1: Getting Started

• Step 2: Receiving and Confirming Receipt of Your Assignment

• Step 3: Drafting the Report

• Step 4: Forwarding the Report & Following Up

Unless otherwise noted, all of the following communications are designed to (and should) occur via email.

Step 1: Getting Started

You, the Digest Contributor, will be assigned reports according to the availability and subject matter preferences you submitted in the sign-up survey. SMCs will simultaneously assign Report Editors and Contributors to a topic. Unless your Coordinator specified otherwise, you will have four days to finish a draft.

If you are unable to complete an assignment, please notify the assigning SMC immediately. If your availability changes during the year, notify the Digest Executive Editor.

Step 2: Receiving and Confirming Receipt of Your Assignment

Instructions

The SMC will send you and the Report Editor an assigning email with:

1. Name of your Contributor and Editor

2. Draft due date

3. Report topic

   1. Background (parties, procedural posture, etc.)

   2. Significance of the case/legislation

   3. Link or attachment to primary source

4. Link to Contributor, Editor, and Style & Citation Guide

5. Credentials for online Bluebook access

If the email is missing any information OR you have questions: immediately contact your Subject Matter Coordinator. If the Coordinator does not respond, feel free to contact the Digest Executive Editor, who are also available to answer questions.

Sample Email

ACTION

Please reply all to this email and confirm that you are able to take on this week's Digest assignment.

SUMMARY

Assignment Date: February 17, 2018

Assignment: summarize Aatrix Software, Inc. v. Green Shades Software, Inc., No. 2017-1452, 2018 WL 843288 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 14, 2018) along with links to at least two outside sources. You can find examples of posts at https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/category/?cat=patent.

Draft Deadline (Contributor send draft to me and Editor): 11:59 p.m. Thurs, Feb 22.

Edits Deadline (Editor send marked up draft to me and Contributor): 11:59 p.m. Sat, Feb 24.

Thanks for writing for Digest this semester! According to the Fall 2017 Report Schedule, <Contributor>, you have been assigned the role of Digest Contributor for this week. <Editor>, you are assigned the role or Report Editor.

ASSIGNMENT <Contributor>, your task is to summarize Aatrix Software, Inc. v. Green Shades Software, Inc., No. 2017-1452, 2018 WL 843288 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 14, 2018).

At issue here is whether the patented technology should have been patent-eligible. 35 U.S.C. § 101 defines what may be patented. Courts have consistently held that abstract ideas, laws of nature, and natural phenonmenons are not patentable. The question then often turns on what falls in each of these three categories. Though commonplace, the issue is probably the most fundamental question in patent law and supported by one of the least defined doctrines in the field.

You will almost certainly come across the Alice test. Courts applying the test engage in a two-step inquiry. In step one, courts figure out whether the matter at issue falls in one of the three patent-ineligible categories: abstract idea, laws of nature, or natural phenomenon. If not, then it is patentable. If so, then the courts ask whether there is an "inventive concept" that "transforms" the patent-ineligible matter into something "more" that is patentable. Readers will be most curious about the facts the courts considered in reaching their decisions on each of these steps.

<Editor>, your job is to ensure the report is substantively accurate and give suggestions on big picture flow. Defer to the Contributor on writing style.

This can be a very confusing case so don't hesitate to email me with any questions. You'll find the case at http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/17-1452.Opinion.2-12-2018.1.PDF (also attached). You can find other Federal Circuit cases at http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/search/report.html.

In addition to summarizing the case, your article should also include at least 2 hyperlinks to related material and/or commentary. These can include briefs (filed by the party or amicus), legal blogs, JOLT articles or Digest posts, news articles.

You can find an example of a Digests post here.

You should follow the appropriate Digest Report guides: Style & Citations Guide, Contributor's Guide, and Editor's Guide. On occasion, the Style Guide requires you to follow the Bluebook (though we never pincite). JOLT maintains several online bluebook accounts to help with that process. Log-in with the following credentials at www.legalbluebook.com.

Accounts: [excluded]

Password: [excluded]

<Contributor>, please send <Editor> and me your draft by 11:59pm Wed, Feb 21. <Editor>, please send the marked up draft to <Contributor> and me by 11:59pm Sat, Feb 24. Requirements are listed in your corresponding guides. Please follow them closely.

Lastly, Digest is looking to constantly improve the publication process. If you find any part of it confusion -- the requirements, guides, communication, etc. -- please let us know so that we can make adjustments.

Your Responsibilities

After receiving your assignment from the Subject Matter Coordinator (SMC), immediately "reply all" to the email and:

1. Confirm to the Coordinator and Editor that you have received and can complete the assignment.

2. Alert the Coordinator and Editor to any problems that may delay your submission

If you simply cannot write the report within the required time, please let the SMC know as soon as possible so the SMC can find another Contributor. Note that you may not have the opportunity to write a Digest report at a later time.

Step 3: Drafting the Report

The purpose of Digest reports is to provide a relatively brief and ideologically-neutral overview of their subject.

Your Responsibilities

1. Read the original source provided in the assignment email

2. Draft an impartial summary of the assignment email

3. Include in the summary two links to outside sources

Instructions

As a Contributor, you are responsible for the technical and substantive accuracy of the report. Refer to the Citation, Style, and Substance Guide for:

1. What to look for in a case or legislation

2. How to format citations

3. Style guidelines

Please be very careful not to overstate or misrepresent the source. Digest Reports are often on the first page of Google inquiries for cutting-edge cases -- getting it wrong has consequences. If you are unsure how to summarize a particular point, please ask for help. If all else fails, consider paraphrasing or quoting the source.

Visit Digest for examples of edited reports. Here are several examples.

Length - while the report’s length will vary with the complexity of the subject, generally the report should be no longer than 500–700 words. The purpose of the report is to provide an accurate overview of the most important aspects of the subject. Readers interested in further detail can visit the primary and secondary sources that will be included.

Google Docs - Please use Google Docs to draft, share, and edit your piece.

Report Structure & Organization

Please ensure that each submission adheres to the general organizational format described below. Contributors should not include their own independent analysis of the subject. Any analysis in the report should be clearly attributed to the source: either the court (by so stating) or to an author (by linking to the source). The standard structure is as follows.

1. Report Title beginning with the colloquial case name;

2. By-line, including names of the Contributor and the Editor;

3. Citation to the subject, in the standard Digest format, and a hyperlink to the primary source;

4. Opening Synopsis

   • Brief description of the subject (one or two sentences)

   • Short summary of the principal holdings, important legislative provisions, or reasons why the event being described is important (one or two paragraphs)

5. Other Analysis

   • Description of the subject (see the resources following this structure for more subject-specific information)

   • Significance of subject according to the source (case--court; legislation--legislature)

   • Significance of subject according to secondary sources (e.g. expert blogs)

6. Additional Resources

   1. Commentary: news articles, if accurate, & scholarly comment

   2. Related materials

7. Optional: one line describing yourself and your interests which will be included at the end of your contributor post. e.g. "[Contributor’s name] is a (1L, 2L, 3L) at the Harvard Law School."

Sample Case Report

Examples can be found here and here.

Tags: [Work with your Report Editor to come up with tags. Guidelines are available here] Social Media Line: U.S. surveillance programs collect #Verizon metadata and access participating company servers goo.gl/wGBFQ #privacy

[Title] By [author] – Edited by [editor] [Full citation of main case, hyperlinked to a primary source. See Citations for an example.]

The [insert court name] (affirmed/reversed/reversed & vacated) the [insert lower court name], which had [insert description of lower court’s holding & order].

The [insert court name] held that [insert 2–3 sentence description of holding & any relevant reasoning]. In so holding, the court (stated/noted that) [insert description of any interesting/significant legal analysis, particularly of any underlying statutes or policy].

[insert brief discussion of the relevant facts]. In holding as it did, the court reasoned that [insert reasoning].

[insert judge name] dissented. The dissent would have held [insert description of dissent’s preferred resolution & reasoning underlying dissent].

The [insert hyperlink] provides an overview of the case. [insert hyperlink to commentary] criticizes the decision [insert one-phrase summary of criticism]. [Insert brief 2–4 sentence discussion of why case is significant (if known)]

Sample Legislation Report

See example.

Tags: [Work with your Report Editor to come up with tags. Guidelines are available here] Social Media Line: U.S. surveillance programs collect #Verizon metadata and access participating company servers goo.gl/wGBFQ #privacy

[Title] By [author] – Edited by [editor]

[House or Senate number] – [Name of the Act] [link to the full text of the bill] [link to the Senate Vote Summary] [link to the GovTrack.us Summary]

On [insert date], the House/Senate passed [insert name of legislation]. This legislation [insert brief description of major provisions of bill and what it is designed to do.] The bill was originally introduced by [insert congressman name] (R/D-[party affiliation]). Prior to its passage, it was amended [briefly describe nature of amendments]. According to [state source — committee report, floor debate, news release], the purpose of the legislation is to [insert brief description of purpose].

A summary of the history surrounding the bill is available here [insert hyperlink] [insert hyperlink to commentary] calls the legislation a [insert quote or commentary].

[insert brief discussion of significance]

Step 4: Forwarding the Report

Your Responsibilities

1. Comment sections of your Report that you believe need a closer review

2. Share your draft on Google Doc

3. Work with the Editor to finalize the piece

4. Be available for any follow-up edits from the Subject Matter Coordinator

Please share your draft on Google Doc with the following:

• Report Editor

• Assigning Subject Matter Coordinator

• Digest Executive Editor ([e-mail])

The easiest way to do this is to share a link in the assigning email thread. The Editor will have about two days to add comments and suggestions in the Google Doc. Please review them, finalize the draft, and notify the assigning SMC (via the email thread). The SMC will take one last look and may offer an additional round of comments to be reviewed before sending it to production.

Expect a follow-up email from the SMC once your piece goes live.

Thank you!

The JOLT Digest team thanks you for the time you will be putting into creating Digest content. We hope you enjoy the content creation process and working with the subject matter of your assignments. Please feel free to email the Digest Masthead if you have any concerns or suggestions on improving the process!