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: 2023-10-02
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: 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.
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: 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.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Shari L. Klevens, Alanna G. Clair
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
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.
Publication Date: 2023-09-25
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Pharmaceuticals
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bryson
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-913-WCB MEMORANDUM OPINION
Court declined to dismiss patent infringement case on collateral estoppel grounds where present action was asserting other independent claims that contained elements not expressly recited in claims addressed in the parties' prior action.
Publication Date: 2023-09-11
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Construction | Energy
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert J. Denhey, Andrew R. Remming, Matthew 0. Talmo, Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; David Dunn, Allison Wuertz, Hogan Lovells US LLP, New York, NY for appellant.
for defendant: Brian A. Sullivan, Werb & Sullivan, Wilmington, DE; Don Fogel, Fogel & McEvily, LLC, Houston, TX for appellee.
Case Number: 22-1371-CFC
Bankruptcy court correctly dismissed statutory disgorgement and turnover claims against assignee of unlicensed contractor who held invoices owed by debtor, where California's statutory provision authorizing recovery of sums paid to unlicensed contractor did not extent to other parties.
Publication Date: 2023-09-11
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Insurance | Pharmaceuticals | Retail
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Wallace
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Karen Jacobs, Alexandra M. Cumings, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Keith J. Harrison, Christopher Flynn, Daniel W. Wolff, Jerome P. DeSanto, Jed Wulfekotte, Cromwell & Moring, LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Corrine Elise Amato, Eric J. Juray, Jason W. Rigby, Prickett, Jones & Elliot, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Neil K. Gilman, Christopher J. Dufek, Brianne Reese, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, Washington DC; John B. Shely, Courtney B. Glaser, Kesley J. Hope, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, Houston, TX for defendants.
Case Number: N19C-12-214 PRW CCLD
Court denied plaintiffs' motion for JNOV/new trial where there were sufficient facts to support the jury's verdict finding in favor of defendants' affirmative defenses of the statute of limitations and voluntary payment.
Publication Date: 2023-09-11
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Wallach
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Francis J. Murphy, Jr., Jonathan L. Parshall, Murphy, Spadaro & Landon, Wilmington, DE; Steven M. Coren, Benjamin M. Mather, Matthew R. Williams, Kauffman, Coren & Ress, P.C, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Brian M. Rostocki, Anne M. Steadman, Justin M. Forcier, Reed Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jonathan K. Youngwood, Janet A. Gochman, Tyler A. Anger, Katherine A. Hardiman, Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett, New York, NY; Kevin R. Shannon, Jonathan A. Choa, Daniel Rusk, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Tracy Richelle High, Scott A. Foltz, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 15-00897-EJW
Court declined to exclude expert report in support of class certification where unreliability of trading model was not fatal to the reliability and admissibility of the report's event study, but plaintiffs' theories of damages in their expert report did not encompass some damages experienced by certain sophisticated investors.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read