Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
Publication Date: 2023-10-02
Practice Area: Copyrights
Industry: Consulting | Software
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bryson
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 23-325-WCB
Court declined to stay civil suit pending related criminal action against defendant's former employees where the procedural posture of the criminal action meant any delay would likely be long, while there was the potential that factual overlap between the cases would be eliminated through dismissal of charges and any prejudice to defendant was limited to being unable to obtain evidence from its former employees.
Publication Date: 2023-10-02
Practice Area: Consumer Protection
Industry: Automotive
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Wallach
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kelly A. Green, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Russell D. Paul, Amey J. Park, Abigail J. Gertner, Natalie Lesser, Berger Montague PC, Philadelphia, PA; Tarek H. Zohdy, Cody R. Padgett, Laura E. Goolsby, Capstone Law APC, Los Angeles, CA; Steven Calamusa, Geoffrey Stahl, Rachel Bentley, Gordon & Partners, P.A., Palm Beach Gardens, FL for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Patrick M. Brannigan, Jessica L. Reno, Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott LLC, Wilmington, DE; Stephen A. D’Aunoy, Thomas L. Azar, Scott H. Morgan, Thompson Coburn LLP, St. Louis, MO for defendant.
Case Number: 21-cv-00906-EJW
Vehicle purchasers' fraud claims against manufacturer failed where their evidence failed to permit an inference that the manufacturer had pre-sale knowledge of an alleged design or manufacturing defect in one of the vehicle's components, and where there was no allegation that the manufacturer knowingly concealed or misrepresented the alleged defect.
Publication Date: 2023-10-02
Practice Area: Insurance Law
Industry: Financial Services and Banking
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Davis
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jennifer C. Wasson, Carla M. Jones, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kenneth H. Frnechman, Michelle R. Migdon, Orrie A. Levy, Samantha Smith, Cohen Ziffer Frenchman & McKenna LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Kurt M. Heyman, Aaron M. Nelson, Kelly E. Rowe, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE: Scott B. Schreiber, Arthur Luk, William C. Perdue, Samuel I. Ferenc, Matthew Bemis, Arnold & Porter Kay Scholer LLP, Washington, D.C.; John C. Phillips, David A. Biilson, Phillips McLaughlin & Hall, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Douglas M. Mangel, Michelle Beecy, Clyde & Co LLP, Washington, D.C.; Geoffrey W. Heineman, Jung H. Park, Ropers Majeski, PC, New York, NY; Robert J. Katzenstein, Julie M. O’Dell, Smith Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Matthew Beato, Jason Chronic, Jessica N. Gallinaro, Wiley Rein LLP, Washington, D.C.; Karen H. Ventrell, CNA Corporate Litigation, Washington, D.C.; Scott A. Schechter, Matthew Mawby, Kaufman Borgeest & Ryan LLP, Valhalla, NY; John G. Day, Bruce E. Jameson, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Alexis J. Rogoski, Edward C. Carleton, Skarzynski Marick & Black LLC, New York, NY; John L. Reed, DLA Piper (US), Wilmington, DE; Steven J. Brodie, Carlton Fields, P.A., Miami, FL; Charles W. Stotter, Carlton Fields, P.A., New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: N22C-05-057 EMD CCLD
Claim reserves and underwriting exclusions to professional liability insurance policy did not apply to underlying lawsuits by long-term care insurance policyholders alleging misrepresentations in the marketing and sale arising from the failure to disclose planned or expected premium increases.
Publication Date: 2023-10-02
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Manufacturing
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Williams
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Susan E. Kaufman, Law Office of Susan E. Kaufman, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Nathan Kilbert, Assistant General Counsel, United Steel Workers, Pittsburgh, PA; Richard M. Seltzer, Melissa S. Woods, Sommer Omar, Cohen, Weiss and Simon LLP, New York, NY for appellant.
for defendant: B. Nelson Sproat, Blank Rome LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew Herman, John Lucian, Blank Rome LLP, Philadelphia, PA for appellee.
Case Number: 22-10252 (JTD)
Relying on the general principle that, notwithstanding a bankruptcy court's authority to extinguish liabilities incurred prior to the sale of the debtor's assets, the court cannot insulate a purchaser from liability for claims arising after the sale due to the purchaser's conduct, the court concluded that appellee's status as a successor to debtor's business was determined by its post-sale conduct in hiring a majority of its workforce from the predecessor and maintaining substantial continuity in business operations.
Publication Date: 2023-10-02
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Williams
Attorneys: For plaintiff: John W. Shaw, Karen E. Keller, Nathan R. Hoeschen, Shaw Keller LLP, Wilmington, DE; Robert Frederickson III, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA; Alexandra D. Valenti, Jenevieve N. Nutovits, Goodwin Procter LLP, New York, NY; Alison Siedor, Goodwin Procter LLP, Washington, D.C. for plaintiff.
for defendant: Francis DiGiovanni, Thatcher A. Rahmeier, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael E. Zeliger, Ranjini Acharya, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, Palo Alto, CA; Evan Finkel, Michael S. Horikawa, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendants.
Case Number: 22-1545-GBW
Court dismissed patent infringement case due to patents being directed to an ineligible abstract idea of using mathematical processes to optimize event schedules, where the patent did not specify new devices or technologies but instead relied upon generic computers and machine learning algorithms.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Michael D. Malfitano
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2023-10-02
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry:
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas W. Briggs, Jr., Alexandra Cumings, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael C. Holmes, Jeffrey Crough, Thomas Mitsch, Vinson & Elkins LLP, Dallas, TX; Matthew R. Freidenberg, Vinson & Elkins LLP, New York, NY; Scott B. Czerwonka, D. Charles Vavala, III, Wilks Law, LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Martin S. Lessner, Elisabeth S. Bradley, M. Paige Valeski, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant. John D. Hendershot, Matthew W. Murphy, Angela Lam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for nominal defendant.
Case Number: 2022-0582-LWW
Noting that a contracting party is obligated to read any contract it signs including any documents incorporated by reference, the court denied defendant relief because it could have discovered the challenged loan terms by exercising ordinary care.
Publication Date: 2023-10-02
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael J. Farnan, Brian E. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Erik B. Milch, Cooley LLP, Reston, VA; Allison Elkman, Cooley LLP, Washington, D.C.; Dena Chen, Deepa Kannappan, Cooley LLP, Palo Alto, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Nathan R. Hoeschen, Karen E. Keller, Shaw Keller LLP, Wilmington, DE; George Lombardi, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL; Claire A. Fundakowski, Joseph C. Masullo, Winston & Strawn LLP, Washington, D.C.; Kelly C. Hunsaker, Michael Rueckheim, Winston & Strawn LLP, Redwood City, CA; Evan Lewis, Winston & Strawn LLP, Houston, TX for defendants.
Case Number: 19-005 (MN)
After crediting the jury's verdict of patent infringement, the court determined that plaintiff had failed to offer any evidence that would serve as a basis for damages and remitted the jury's award to nominal damages of $1.
Publication Date: 2023-09-25
Practice Area: Landlord Tenant Law
Industry:
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Adams
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Andrew D. Cordo, Kaitlin E. Maloney, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Katherine L. Mowery, Griffin A. Schoenbaum, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Mark T. Josephs, Brian H. Oates, Matt M. Johnson, Jackson Walker, LLP, Dallas, TX for defendant.
Case Number: N23C-01-178 MAA CCLD
Court denied landlord summary judgment on tenant's breach of lease agreement where the lease obligated the parties to continue with a revise-or-consent procedure to resolve improvement costs over the tenant allowance, and there was evidence that the tenant was continuing with the procedure until the landlord refused to proceed with revisions and terminated the lease.
Publication Date: 2023-09-25
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Biotechnology
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Slomsky
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-1117
Applying Supreme Court precedent, the court determined that the patents at issue, which focused on compositions and laboratory methods used to uncover genetic information, did not fall within the three exceptions to the broad categories of subject matter eligible for patenting under § 101: laws of nature; physical phenomena; and abstract ideas. Defendant's motion to dismiss denied.
Publication Date: 2023-09-25
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Software
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: John G. Day, Andrew C. Mayo, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; Denise M. De Mory, Michael N. Zachary, Jennifer L. Gilbert, Richard C. Lin, Bunsow De Morey, Redwood City, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Kelly E. Farnan, Sara M. Metzler, Richards, Layton & Finger P.A., Wilmington, DE; James F. Valentine, Perkins Coie LLP, Palo Alto, CA; Christopher G. Hanewicz, Perkins Coie LLP, Madison, WI; Matthew J. Moffa, Thomas V. Matthew, Perkins Coie LLP, New York, NY for defendant.
Case Number: 20-358-RGA
Court declined to exclude plaintiff's expert's opinions in patent infringement suit, finding that the expert correctly used the stipulated construction of terms in the patent-in-suit in at least two theories of infringement.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read