Filter This View

  • InQuisient Inc. v. ServiceNow, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-03-07
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: E-Commerce | Software
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Susan E. Morrison, Fish & Richardson P.C., Wilmington, DE; Frank E. Scherkenbach, Adam Kessel, Andrew Pearson, Fish & Richardson P.C., Boston, MA; Jason W. Wolff, Fish & Richardson P.C., San Diego, CA; Excylyn Hardin-Smith, Fish & Richardson P.C., New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Jennifer Ying, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kevin P.B. Johnson, Diane M. Doolittle, Ray Zado, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Redwood Shores, CA; Marissa R. Ducca, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Washington, D.C.; Jodie Cheng, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, San Francisco, CA for defendant.
    Case Number: 22-900-CJB

    Court declined to dismiss patent infringement case at pleadings stage due to lack of patent-eligible subject matter where patent claims appeared to describe new method of electronic data management solving existing problems of flexibility and portability between databases, which constituted an inventive concept beyond the abstract idea of managing data.

  • Hewlett Packard Enter. Co. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-12-20
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: E-Commerce
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian A. Biggs, Angela C. Whitesell, DLA Piper LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sean Cunningham, Erin P. Gibson, Tiffany Miller, DLA Piper LLP, San Diego, CA; Helena Kiepura, DLA Piper LLP, Washington, DC; Brent Yamashita, DLA Piper LLP, East Palo Alto, CA; Dawn Jenkins, DLA Piper LLP, Houston, TX; Nancy C. Braman, DLPA Piper LLP, Boston, MA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Matthew D. Vella, Robert R. Gilman, Aaron Jacobs, Prince Lobel Tye LLP, Boston, MA for defendants.
    Case Number: 22-730-GBW-CJB

    Court denied defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction in a patent infringement case, noting that they had subject matter jurisdiction to hear the cause pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act.

  • Horizon Med. LLC v. Apotex Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-12-06
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Karen E. Keller, Andrew E. Russell, Nathan R. Hoeschen, Emily S. DiBenedetto, Shaw Keller LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sanya Sukduang, Johnathan R. Davis, Allison E. Elkman, Cooley LLP, Washington, DC; Mazda Antia, Erin Trenda, Cooley LLP, San Diego, CA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Kenneth L. Dorsney, Cortlan S. Hitch, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Deepro R. Mukerjee, Lance A. Soderstrom, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, New York, NY; Joseph M. Janusz, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Charlotte, NC for defendants.
    Case Number: 22-640-CJB

    A patent licensor could issue a license to a future continuation patent that was ultimately not issued to the licensor by expressly including future continuation patents in the scope of the license since permitting the eventual patent owner to sue for infringement of the continuation patent would undermine rights acquired for consideration by the licensee.

  • Murphy v. St. Jude Med., LLC

    Publication Date: 2021-12-21
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David G. Culley, Tybout, Redfearn & Pell, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff;
    for defendant: Brian M. Rostocki, Reed Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
    Case Number: D69652

    Product liability claim based on "indeterminate product test" dismissed where the test provided an evidentiary means of proving manufacturing defects but did not itself constitute a separate legal claim.

  • Guinn v. St. Jude Med., LLC

    Publication Date: 2021-12-14
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David G. Culley, Tybout, Redfearn & Pell, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff
    for defendant: Brian M. Rostocki, Reed Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE; J. David Bickham, Reed Smith LLP, San Francisco, CA; Michael K. Brown, Reed Smith LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendants
    Case Number: D69645

    Motion to dismiss amended product liability claim involving medical device denied where the amended complaint asserted new facts further explaining the similarities between the product-in-suit and other products subject to consumer complaints and recalls.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Library of Pennsylvania Family Law Forms, Fourth Edition

    Authors: Joseph S. Britton

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Galderma Lab., L.P. v. Medinter US LLC

    Publication Date: 2020-03-25
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jack B. Blumenfeld and Michael J. Flynn, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joseph A. Mahoney, Mayer Brown LLP, Charlotte, NC; B. Clayton McCraw and Ying-Zi Yang, Mayer Brown LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Melanie K. Sharp, James L. Higgins and Michelle M. Ovanesian, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Steven Lieberman, Rachel M. Echols, Daniel R. McCallum and Nicole M. DeAbrantes, Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C., Washington, DC for defendant.
    Case Number: D68922

    The court dismissed plaintiff's claim for direct patent infringement, but it denied the motion to dismiss as to the claim for indi-rect infringement.

  • Freed v. St. Jude Med., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-10-30
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David G. Culley, Tybout, Redfearn & Pell, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Brian M. Rostocki and Benjamin P. Chapple, Reed Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE; J. David Bickham, Reed Smith LLP, San Francisco, CA; Lisa M. Baird, Reed Smith LLP, Miami, FL; and Michael K. Brown, Reed Smith LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendants.
    Case Number: D68751

    Products liability claims not dismissed where defendants failed to raise arguments in favor of dismissal in defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' prior version of their complaint containing similar or identical claims.

  • S.I.SV.EL. Societa Italiana Per Lo Sviluppo Dell' Elettronica S.P.A. v. Rhapsody Int'l Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-06-19
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: E-Commerce
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Timothy Devlin, Devlin Law Firm LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: David E. Moore, Bindu A. Palapura and Stephanie E. O'Byrne, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE for defend-ants Rhapsody Int'l and Spotify USA Inc. Patrick Bageant, Hollystone Law, Boise, ID for defendant Rhapsody Int'l. Stefani E. Shanberg and Michael J. Guo, Morrison & Foerster LLP, San Francisco, CA for defendant Spotify USA Inc.
    Case Number: D68605

    Defendants were not entitled to summary judgment, because genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether the patent involved an inventive concept.

  • Talley v. Christiana Care Health Sys.

    Publication Date: 2019-03-06
    Practice Area: Business Torts | Employment Litigation
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michele D. Allen and Catilyn E. Quinn, Allen and Assoc., Hockessin, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Joanna J. Cline, James H.S. Levine, Barbara T. Sicalides, Barak A. Bassman and Megan Morley of Pepper Hamilton LLP, Wilmington, DE and Philadelphia, PA for defendants.
    Case Number: D68453

    Plaintiff 's tortious interference claims against two individual defendants were precluded by the bootstrapping doctrine.

  • Bolden v. City of Wilmington

    Publication Date: 2019-01-23
    Practice Area: Government
    Industry: Real Estate | State and Local Government
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Geena Khomenko George, Losco & Marconi, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Aaron C. Baker, City of Wilmington Law Department, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
    Case Number: D68435

    Plaintiff failed to adequately allege claims against a municipality for negligence and deprivation of due process.