• Jaroslawicz v. M&T Bank Corp.

    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.

  • Bone v. XTO Energy, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-09-04
    Practice Area: Labor Law
    Industry: Consulting | Energy
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Slomsky
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-1460

    Court declined to dismiss Fair Labor Standards Act overtime action where defendant controlled the means of plaintiffs' work and plaintiffs had no opportunity for business profit or loss or to market their services to other companies.

  • Backertop Licensing LLC v. Canary Connect, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-09-04
    Practice Area: Intellectual Property
    Industry: Software
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David L. Finger, Finger & Slanina, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jimmy C. Chong, Chong Law Firm, PA, Wilmington, DE; Ronald W. Burns, Frisco, Texas for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Alan Richard Silverstein, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark K. Suri, Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, Chicago, IL; Jeremy Douglas Anderson, Fish & Richardson, P.C., Wilmington, DE; Ricardo J. Bonilla, Fish & Richardson, P.C., Dallas, TX for defendants.

    Case Number: 22-572-CFC

    Court imposed a civil contempt sanction upon plaintiff's owner for her failure to appear for questioning by the court as ordered, as the court had the inherent authority to impose contempt to enforce its lawful orders.

  • Compagnie des Grands Htels d'Afrique S.A. v. Starman Hotel Holdings LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-08-21
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Hospitality and Lodging
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Bibas
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Andrew S. Dupre, Sarah E. Delia, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; David Spears, Cynthia Chen, Zacharia Chibane, Spears & Imes LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: David E. Ross, S. Michael Sirkin, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeffrey L. Willian, Devora W. Allon, Gilad Y. Bendheim, Patrick J. Gallagher, Vera C. Esses, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: 1:18-cv-00654-SB-SRF

    Court dismissed complaint seeking to pierce corporate veil where plaintiff failed to present evidence that parent and subsidiary failed to observe corporate formalities.

  • Magnolia Med. Tech., Inc. v. Kurin, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-08-21
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Rodger Dallery Smith II, Anthony David Raucci, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Ashok Ramani, David J. Lisson, Micah G. Block, Ian Hogg, Serge A. Voronov, Davis Polk & Wardell LLP, Menlo Park, CA; Kathryn B. Bi, Alena Farber, Davis Polk & Wardell LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kelly E. Farnan, Nicole Kathleen Pedi, Richards, Layton & Finger, PA, Wilmington, DE; Catherine Nyarady, Kripa Raman, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY; Nicholas Groombridge, Groombridge, Wu, Baughman & Stone LLP, New York, NY; Jonathan Hangartner, X-Patents, APC, La Jolla, CA for defendant.

    Case Number: 19-97-CFC

    Court stayed motion for judgment of indefiniteness where plaintiff's expert described claim limitation as functional despite court construing it as structural, potentially giving defendant a viable argument in support of a motion for judgment as a matter of law of noninfringement.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Florida Evidence and Procedure 2019

    Authors: Patrick S. Montoya, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Rivera v. The Nemours Found

    Publication Date: 2023-08-21
    Practice Area: Employment Litigation
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Daniel Rivera, Philadelphia, PA, pro se plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kathleen Furey McDonough, Jennifer Penberthy Buckley, Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: 21-1825-CFC

    Court denied employer motion for summary judgment on former employee's discrimination/wrongful termination claim where employee alleged that his supervisor directed a discriminatory remark towards him, creating a triable issue of fact as to pretext where employer terminated employee for using inappropriate language but, despite being informed of the supervisor's comment, imposed no discipline on the supervisor.

  • Prolitec Inc. v. ScentAir Technologies, LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-08-21
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Bryson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 20-984-WCB

    In considering a motion to stay proceedings pending completion of an ex parte reexamination of the patent claims by the patent office, the court concluded that, while there was some risk of prejudice to defendant given that the parties were competitors, that risk was outweighed by the potential that the reexamination proceedings would simplify the issues in the case.

  • Cilag GmbH Int'l v. Hospira Worldwide, LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-08-14
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Beth Moskow-Schnoll, Brian S.S. Auerbach, Brittany M. Giusini, Ballard Spahr LLP, Wilmington, DE; Alejandro H. Cruz, Nathaniel Lancaster, William F. Cavanaugh, Patterson Belkamp Webb & Tyler LLP, New York, NY; Mark A. Neubauer, Steven B. Weisburd, Carlton Fields, LLP, Los Angeles, CA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Arthur G. Connolly, III, Alan Richard Silverstein, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Wilmington, DE; David G. Hille, Katrina Fetsch, Kimberly A. Haviln, White & Case, LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: 22-589-RGA-SRF

    The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss a third-party claim ruling that, for a third-party to recover for a breach of contract, it must appear that the parties to the contract intended to recognize the third-party as the primary party in interest and as privy to the contract.

  • Take2 Techs. Ltd. v. Pac. Biosciences of California, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-08-14
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Biotechnology | Software
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Bryson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-1595-WCB

    Court granted defendant's motion to transfer venue in patent infringement case where most of the development of the allegedly infringing product took place in defendant's home venue and, because the product was sold nationwide, any alleged infringement did not occur primarily or substantially in Delaware.

  • CareDx, Inc. v. Natera, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-08-07
    Practice Area: Business Torts
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Edward R. Reines, Derek C. Walter, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, Redwood Shores, CA; Randi Singer, Elizabeth McLean, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Derek J. Fahnestock, Anthony D. Raucci, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kristin J. Achterhof, Julia L. Mazur, Martin S. Masar III, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Chicago, IL; Christina L. Costley, Paul S. Yong, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Bruce G. Vanyo, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, New York, NY; Timothy H. Gray, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.

    Case Number: 19-662-CFC

    Court granted defendant's judgment as a matter of law on the issue of Lanham Act damages where plaintiff presented no evidence that any customer was misled or relied upon defendant's advertisements found false by the jury.