Sign in to follow
Search Results

0 results for 'Marshall Gerstein'

You can use to get even better search results
Appellate Term, Second Department: July 19, 2019
Publication Date: 2019-07-23
Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Appellate Term, First Department, Second, Eleventh and Thirteenth JudicIal Districts & Ninth and Tenth JudicIal DisTRICTS
Judge: Unsigned
Attorneys:
For plaintiff:
For defendant:
Case number: DOCKET

Appellate Term, Second Department: July 19, 2019

May 01, 2019 | Pro Mid Market

IP Boutique Marshall Gerstein is 'Always Innovating,' MP Says

"We have invested in and will continue to invest in technologies that allow us to achieve our clients' desires for efficient and effective legal services," managing partner Jeffrey Sharp said.
5 minute read
Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon Inc.
Publication Date: 2019-01-02
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: E-Commerce | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys:
For plaintiff: David E. Moore, Bindu A. Palapura and Stephanie E. O'Byrne of Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jonathan K. Waldrop, Darcy L. Jones, Marcus A. Barber, John W. Downing, Heather S. Kim and Jack Shaw of Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP , Redwood Shores, CA; Hershy Stern and Rodney R. Miller of Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
For defendant: Steven J. Balick and Andrew C. Mayo of Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; Thomas L. Duston and Tron Y. Fun of Marshall, Gerstein and Borun, LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.
Case number: D68409

Plaintiff's patent claims involved abstract ideas, but the court denied defendant's motion to dismiss because unresolved factual issues existed regarding the nature of the claims.

Appellate Term, Second Department:November 8, 2018
Publication Date: 2018-11-15
Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Appellate Term, Second Department, Second, Eleventh and Thirteenth JudicIal Districts
Judge: Unsigned
Attorneys:
For plaintiff:
For defendant:
Case number: DOCKET

Appellate Term, Second Department:November 8, 2018

Appellate Term, Second Department:November 8, 2018
Publication Date: 2018-11-14
Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Appellate Term, Second Department, Cases Released
Judge: Unsigned
Attorneys:
For plaintiff:
For defendant:
Case number: DOCKET

Appellate Term, Second Department:November 8, 2018

Appellate Division, Second Department:September 12, 2018
Publication Date: 2018-09-13
Practice Area: Appellate Division Activity | Civil Appeals | Criminal Appeals
Industry:
Court: Appellate Division, Second Department, Handdown & Order on Application Lists
Judge: Unsigned
Attorneys:
For plaintiff:
For defendant:
Case number: DOCKET

Appellate Division, Second Department:September 12, 2018

August 17, 2018 | Law.com

Skilled in the Art: Going En Banc on Patent Footnotes + Turns Out $51 Million in Attorney Fees Is a Bit Much

The decision delved into whether voluntarily withdrawing a patent infringement case reset the clock for filing inter partes review.
8 minute read
June 22, 2018 | Law.com

Skilled in the Art: Words to the Wise From the Federal Circuit | Plus, PopSockets Pops Counterfeiters

The Federal Circuit Bar Association hosted its annual Bench-Bar conference, which touched on hot mics, and writing better briefs.
2 minute read
Odonnell v. Harris County
Publication Date: 2018-06-11
Practice Area: Civil Rights
Industry:
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Clement
Attorneys:
For plaintiff:
For defendant:
Case number: 17-20333

The court granted Harris County's petition for panel rehearing, withdrew its prior opinion, and issued a new opinion.

Odonnell v. Harris County
Publication Date: 2018-02-26
Practice Area: Civil Rights | Class Actions
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Clement
Attorneys:
For plaintiff:
For defendant:
Case number: 17-20333

Plaintiffs brought a class action suit against Harris County and several county officials, alleging that the countys system of setting bail for indigent misdemeanor arrestees violated Texas statutory and constitutional law, as well as the equal protection and due process clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.

TRENDING STORIES

    More from ALM

    More from ALM

    Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.

    Resources