Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
16 results for '* judge:"District Judge Burke"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2024-02-26
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Consulting | Entertainment and Leisure | Retail
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Burke
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joseph L. Christensen, Christensen & Dougherty LLP, Wilmington, DE; Edward Totino, Nancy Nguyen Sims, Michael T. Boardman, Baker & McKenzie LLP, Los Angeles, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: John M. Seaman, E. Wade Houston, Christopher Fitzpatrick Cannataro, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Trey Cox, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Dallas, TX for defendant.
Case Number: 22-363-CJB
Court granted partial dismissal of breach of contract claim where parties reached written agreement on only one set of figures for three of their projects, meaning the parties had not reached a complete written agreement.
Publication Date: 2023-12-25
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Consumer Products | Manufacturing | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Burke
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kenneth L. Dorsney, Cortlan S. Hitch, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Robert L. Maier, Jennifer C. Tempesta, Michael E. Knierim, Nick Palmieri, Baker Botts L.L.P., New York, NY; Sarah J. Guske, Baker Botts L.L.P., San Francisco, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Karen Jacobs, Michael J. Flynn, Cameron P. Clark, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Anupam Sharma, Robert T. Haslam, Covington & Burling LLP, Palo Alto, CA; Richard L. Rainey, Han Park, Covington & Burling LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.
Case Number: 22-987-CJB
Receipt of notice of infringement only a day prior to the filing of the complaint was insufficient to charge defendant with pre-suit knowledge of the asserted patents.
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: 2023-11-20
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: 2023-04-11
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Consulting | Entertainment and Leisure
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Burke
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas A. Uebler, Joseph L. Christensen, McCollom D’Emilio Smith Uebler LLC, Wilmington, DE; Edward Totino, Nancy Nguyen Sims, Michael T. Boardman, Baker & Mckenzie LLP, Los Angeles, CA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: John M. Seaman, E. Wade Houston, Abrams & Bayliss, Wilmington, DE; Trey Cox, Paulette C. Miniter, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Dallas, TX for defendants.
Case Number: 22-363-CJB
Where contract detailed procedure by which parties were to negotiate undefined variable compensation fees, the contract created a duty to negotiate in good faith and allegations that customer failed to lodge reasoned objections or otherwise participate in the negotiation process was sufficient to state a claim for breach.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: George Bochetto, David P. Heim, John A. O’Connell, Robert S. Tintner
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read