• AgroFresh Inc. v. Mirtech, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-01-16
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Agriculture | Chemicals and Materials | Consumer Products
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Noreika
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Chad S.C. Stover and Regina S.E. Murphy, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Wilmington, DE; Robert D. Mac-Gill, Lynn C. Tyler, Deborah Pollack-Milgate, Joseph T. Wendt and Jessica M. Lindemann, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Indianapolis, IN for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Frederick L. Cottrell, III, Jeffrey L. Moyer and Nicole K. Pedi of Richards, Layton & Finger, Wilmington, DE; Gerald F. Ivey, John M. Williamson, Anand K. Sharma, Rajeev Gupta, Aidan C. Skoyles, Karthik Kumar and Daniel F. Roland, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.

    Case Number: D68424

    In this patent claim construction matter, the court provided clarification to give meaning to all the claim terms.

  • In re Fitbit, Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litig.

    Publication Date: 2018-12-26
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Consumer Products | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Peter B. Andrews, Craig J. Springer and David M. Sborz, Andrews & Springer LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jessica Zeldin of Rosenthal, Monhait & Goddess, P.A., Wilmington, DE, Melinda A. Nicholson and Michael R. Robinson, Kahn Swick & Foti, LLC, Madisonville, LA; Robert C. Schubert of Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe LLP, San Francisco, CA; Edward F. Haber of Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP, Boston, MA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Elena C. Norman, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP; Wilmington, DE; Jordan Eth, Anna Erickson White and Ryan M. Keats, Morrison & Foerster LLP, San Francisco, CA for defendants.

    Case Number: D68405

    Plaintiffs demonstrated demand futility, and their allegations were sufficient to state a claim against the company's board of directors for breach of fiduciary duty.

  • Olympus Corp. v. Maxell, Ltd.

    Publication Date: 2018-11-28
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Consumer Products | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Noreika
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: John W. Shaw, Karen E. Keller, and Nathan R. Hoeschen, Shaw Keller LLP, Wilmington, DE; William J. McCabe, Matthew J. Moffa, and Thomas V. Matthew, Perkins Coie LLP, New York, NY; Kyle R. Canavera, Perkins Coie LLP, San Diego, CA for plaintiffs
    for defendant: Timothy Devlin and James Gorman, Devlin Law Firm LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jamie B. Beaber, Kfir B. Levy, James A. Fussell, III, Tiffany A. Miller, Baldine B. Paul, and Alison T. Gelsleichter, Mayer Brown LLP, Washington, DC; Robert G. Pluta, Mayer Brown LLP, Chicago, IL for defendant.

    Case Number: D68369

    Patent-in-suit was not directed to patent-ineligible subject matter where it addressed technological improvements to enable camera with recording/play-back capabilities that consumed less power, rather than being directed to the general abstract idea of battery or resource conservation.

  • CompoSecure, LLC v. CardUX, LLC

    Publication Date: 2018-11-21
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Consumer Products | Manufacturing
    Court: Delaware Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Valihura
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Myron T. Steele, Arthur L. Dent, and Andrew H. Sauder of Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Steven M. Coren and David M. DeVito of Kaufman, Coren & Ress, P.C., Philadelphia, PA, attorneys for appellants
    for defendant: David J. Margules, Elizabeth A. Sloan, and Jessica C. Watt of Ballard Spahr LLP, Wilmington, DE; Burt M. Rublin of Ballard Spahr LLP, Philadelphia, PA, attorneys for appellees.

    Case Number: D68358

    Judgment reversed and remanded where parties concurred that if provision of alleged breaching party's operating agreement applied to the parties' sales agreement, it would render that agreement void and incapable of ratification by the parties' conduct.

  • Delaware Law Weekly

    Del. Judge Tosses Out-of-State Talc Suits Against Johnson & Johnson

    September 12, 2018

    The Delaware Superior Court judge overseeing more than 200 lawsuits alleging that Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder products had caused ovarian cancer has dismissed all claims from out-of-state plaintiffs, ruling this week that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the cases after the U.S. Supreme Court's 2017 ruling in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California.

  • The Legal Intelligencer

    US Judge OKs $15.5M Settlement Against Comcast in Class Action Over Set-Top Boxes

    September 06, 2018

    A Philadelphia federal district judge has granted preliminary approval of a $15.5 million class action settlement against the cable giant Comcast.

  • Mabey v. Crystalite Bohemia, S.R.O.

    Publication Date: 2018-02-21
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Consumer Products
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Davis
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: D68050

    Plaintiffs did not allege a direct connection between a non-resident defendant and Delaware under the long-arm statute, but plaintiffs made a plausible argument in support of personal jurisdiction.

  • Ansell Healthcare Prod. LLC v. Reckitt Benckiser LLC

    Publication Date: 2018-02-14
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Consumer Products | Health Care
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Colm F. Connolly, David W. Marston, Jr., Jody C. Barillare, and John V. Goodman, Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, Wimington, DE; Thomas B. Kenworthy and Julie S. Goldemberg, Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, Philadelphia, PA; Raymond R. Moser, Jr., Moser Taboada, Shrewsbury, NJ, attorneys for plaintiff
    for defendant: Adam W. Poff and Pilar G. Kraman, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilimington, DE; Douglas J. Nash, John D. Cook, Kathryn D. Cornish, Barclay Damon, LLP, Syracuse, NY, attorneys for defendant.

    Case Number: D68038

    Willful infringement and enhanced damages claim denied where defendants willful blindness to its products possible infringement of plaintiffs patents was at most a substitute for knowledge and did not constitute sufficient egregious behavior to support enhanced damages.

  • Delaware Law Weekly

    Morris Nichols Elects 4 Lawyers to Partner

    January 15, 2018

    Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell appointed Kate Betterly, Brian Egan, Michael Flynn and Dan Matthews to partner.

  • Standard General L.P. v. Charney

    Publication Date: 2018-01-03
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Contracts
    Industry: Consumer Products
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Bouchard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Raymond J. DiCamillo, Matthew D. Perri, Shannon Rose Selden, Derek Wikstrom and Justin Horton for plaintiffs
    for defendant: Mark M. Billion for defendant.

    Case Number: D67997

    Defendant could not have reasonably relied on oral promises which allegedly induced him to sign a series of agreements, be-cause the express terms of the agreements contradicted the alleged oral representations.