Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
1,126 results for '* court:"U S District Court of Delaware"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2023-12-11
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Legal Services | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-1247-CFC
Court referred plaintiffs' counsel for disciplinary investigations after finding that they acted at the direction of patent monetization firms rather than the named plaintiffs in the present patent infringement cases.
Publication Date: 2023-12-04
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Electronics | Manufacturing | Software
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Burke
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Philip A. Rovner, Jonathan A. Choa, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Paul J. Andre, Lisa Kobialka, James Hannah, Timothy Layden, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Redwood Shores, CA; Aaron M. Frankel, Cristina L. Martinez, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Karen Jacobs, Cameron P. Clark, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; John D. Vandenberg, Kristin L. Cleveland, Mark W. Wilson, Klarquist Sparkman, LLP, Portland, OR; Kristina R. Cary, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Boston, MA; Gregg F. LoCascio, P.C., Michael A. Pearson, Jr., Matthew J. McIntee, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Washington, DC; Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Clement Naples, Latham & Watkins LLP, New York, NY; Gabriel K. Bell, Latham & Watkins LLP, Washington, DC; Thomas W. Yeh, Latham & Watkins LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Brett M. Sanford, Daniel S. Todd, Latham & Watkins LLP, San Francisco, CA for defendants.
Case Number: 22-151-CJB
Court rejected assertion that patent claims were indefinite where intrinsic record provided enough explanation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to understand the scope of the claim and when a product would fall within that scope.
Publication Date: 2023-12-04
Practice Area: Labor Law
Industry: Agriculture | Food and Beverage
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Hughes
Attorneys: For plaintiff: William D. Sullivan, Sullivan Hazeltine Allison LLC, Wilmington, DE; Andrew J. Henrik, Sullivan Hazeltine Allison LLC, Rosemont, IL for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Rudolf Koch, Jason J. Rawnsley, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; James L. Bromley, Andrew J. Finn, Zachary R. Ingber, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 22-1135-TMH
Multiemployer pension plan lacked statutory cause of action under the Multi-employer Pension Plan Amendments Act to enforce private settlement over withdrawal liability where settlement did not qualify as revised assessment.
Publication Date: 2023-12-04
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Williams
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 15-611-GBW
Court granted leave to supplement damages expert report where, although supplementation would cause defendants to incur additional discovery expenses, there would be no delay of trial and the report was critical to plaintiff's ability to prove damages at trial.
Publication Date: 2023-11-27
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Electronics | Health Care | Software
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bryson
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 23-700-WCB
Court declined to dismiss securities and common law fraud claims where acquirer failed to disclose the existence of its obligations under a competing earnout agreement when negotiating acquisition of a company.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Janet K. Colaneri, Bret Weatherford
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2023-11-20
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Automotive | Manufacturing | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; John M. Hughes, Andrew C. Baak, Taylor J. Kelson, Bartlit Beck LLP, Denver, CO; Rebecca T. Horwitz, Mark L. Levine, Bartlit Beck LLP, Chicago, IL for plaintiff.
for defendant: Daryll Hawthorne-Bernardo, Christian J. Singewald, White & Williams LLP, Wilmington, DE; Frank C. Cimino, Jr., Megan S. Woodworth, Jonathan L. Falkler, Charles J. Monterio, Jr., Venable LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.
Case Number: 18-1647-RGA
Court granted summary judgment of non-infringement after accepting defendant's proposed claim construction and struck plaintiff's supplemental declaration raising a doctrine of equivalents theory as untimely where plaintiff never raised the theory in its complaint or during discovery.
Publication Date: 2023-11-20
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Energy | Mining and Resources
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Burke
Attorneys: For plaintiff: James M. Lennon, Devlin Law Firm, Wilmington, DE; Bradley W. Caldwell, Jason D. Cassady, John Austin Curry, Justin T. Nemunaitis, Daniel R. Pearson, Adrienne R. Dellinger, Caldwell Cassady Curry P.C., Dallas, TX for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Kenneth L. Dorsney, Cortlan S. Hitch, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeff Dyess, Paul Sykes, Benn Wilson, Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, Birmingham, AL; Jessica Zurlo, Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, Washington, D.C.; Jack B. Blumenfeld, Brian P. Egan, Anthony D. Raucci, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Richard W. Mark, Joseph Evall, Paul J. Kremer, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, New York, NY; David Glandorf, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Denver, CO; Nicole A. DiSalvo, Jessica R. Kunz, Daniel S. Atlas, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Douglas R. Nemec, Leslie A. Demers, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 19-1334-CJB
Court denied summary judgment to defendants for plaintiffs' contributory infringement claim where there were genuine issues of material fact as to whether defendants' product had other substantial non-infringing uses or whether defendants manufactured the product specifically for use in a manner that infringed upon plaintiffs' patents.
Publication Date: 2023-11-20
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Accounting | Software | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Slomsky
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-65
Court dismissed patent infringement claim where patent was directed to ineligible subject matter by merely claiming the abstract idea of a billing system that used the internet and generic computer technology, without making any claims that constituted an improvement of computer technology.
Publication Date: 2023-11-13
Practice Area: Civil Procedure
Industry: Insurance | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Roger D. Landon, Murphy & Landon, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: James W. Semple, R. Grant Dick IV, Cooch and Taylor P.A., Wilmington, DE; Brooks R. Magratten, Michael J. Daly, Pierce Atwood LLP, Providence, RI for defendant.
Case Number: 23-453-CFC
Court transferred case to Eastern District of Virginia where it involved a dispute over an insurance policy issued to a Virginia-headquartered company and the parties had no connection to Delaware other than the company's state of incorporation.
Publication Date: 2023-11-13
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Manufacturing | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Slomsky
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-00169
Court dismissed claim of misleading proxy statements where allegedly false statements about company's commitment to workforce diversity were non-actionable, aspirational puffery that was immaterial to the investing public.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read