Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
105 results for '* industry:"Federal Government"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-02-22
Practice Area: Creditors' and Debtors' Rights
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Federal Government
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bibas
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Colin T. Reardon, Gabriel S.H. Hopkins, Jane M.E. Peterson, Stephen C. Jacques, Tiffany Hardy, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Washington, D.C. for plaintiff.
for defendant: Megan Ix Brison, Michael A. Weidinger, Pinckney, Weidinger, Urban & Joyce LLC, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69722
The court certified two issues for appeal though there was no final judgment because they were both novel and controlling questions of law with substantial ground for difference of opinion and the appeal would advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.
Publication Date: 2022-02-15
Practice Area: Health Care Law
Industry: Federal Government | Health Care
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Shwartz
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69715
Kickback claims failed as a matter of law where relator could not plausibly allege a financial connection between prescribing healthcare providers and medical equipment suppliers.
Publication Date: 2021-12-28
Practice Area: Consumer Protection
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Federal Government
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bibas
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Carolyn I. Hahn, Colin T. Reardon, Gabriel S.H. Hopkins, Jane M.E. Peterson, Stephen C. Jacques, Tiffany Hardy, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Washington, D.C. for plaintiff;
for defendant: Daniel M. Silver, McCarther & English LLP, Wilmington, DE; Megan Ix Brison, Michael A. Weidinger, Pinckney Weidinger Urban & Joyce LLC, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69660
Agency enforcement action filed by agency head who was subject to an unconstitutional removal provision was not automatically void, thereby eliminating the need for the agency to later timely ratify the action within the statute of limitations.
Publication Date: 2021-12-14
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Biotechnology | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen E. Jenkins, F. Troupe Mickler, IV, Ashby & Geddes, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Gregory V. Varallo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeroen van Kwawegen, Daniel E. Meyer, Margaret Sanborn-Lowing, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Gustavo F. Bruckner, Samuel J.Adams, Daryoush Behbood, Pomerantz LLP, New York, NY; Sascha N. Rand, Rollo C. Baker, IV , Silpa Maruri, Jesse Bernstein, Charles H. Sangree, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY; Stanley D. Bernstein, Matthew Guarnero, Bernstein Liebhard LLP, New York, NY; William J. Fields, Christopher J. Kupka, Samir Shukurov, Fields Kupka & Shukurov LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Brock E. Czeschin, Andrew L. Milam, Richards Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Riccardo DeBari, Renee Zaytsev, Mendy Pie-karski, Thompson Hine, New York, NY; Matthew F. Davis, Abraham C. Schneider, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Douglas A. Rappaport, Kaitlin D. Shapiro, Elizabeth C. Rosen, Madeleine R. Freeman, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D69639
The court held that plaintiff shareholders were required to make a demand on the board prior to filing suit. Because they did not make a demand, their claims failed. Motion to dismiss granted.
Publication Date: 2021-10-20
Practice Area: Insurance Law
Industry: Federal Government | Insurance | State and Local Government
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David A. Hubbert, Acting Assistant Attorney General, David C. Weiss, United States Attorney, Ward W. Benson, Kyle L. Bishop, Trial Attorneys, Tax Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC for petitioner.
for defendant: Kathleen P. Makowski, Deputy Attorney General, State of Delaware Department of Justice; Wilmington, DE; Patricia A. Davis, Deputy State Solicitor, State of Delaware Department of Justice, Dover, DE; James J. Black, III, Jeffrey B. Miceli, Mark W. Drasnin, Black & Gerngross, P.C., Philadelphia, PA for respondent.
Case Number: D69578
The court held that the government's petition to enforce summons on a state department of insurance to produce documents related to captive insurance companies should be granted absent a showing that production constituted the business of insurance.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Michael R. Griffinger, Paul F. Cullum III
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2021-07-21
Practice Area: Administrative Law
Industry: Federal Government
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Stark
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Angela Pinto Ross, Doroshow, Pasquale, Krawitz & Bhaya, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: David C. Weiss, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Wilmington, DE; Heather Benderson, Brian C. O’Donnell, Melissa K. Curry, Office of General Counsel, Social Security Administration, Philadelphia, PA for defendant.
Case Number: D69473
Where an administrative law judge did not consider the opinions of a claimant's medical professionals re-garding conditions stated in his application, the court remanded because the decision was not based on sub-stantial evidence.
Publication Date: 2021-06-30
Practice Area: Health Care Law
Industry: Federal Government | Pharmaceuticals
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Stark
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael P. Kelly, Daniel M. Silver, Alexandra M. Joyce, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Allon Kedem, Jeffrey L. Handwerker, Sally L. Pei, Stephen K. Wirth, Arnold & Porter Kay Scholer LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiff.
for defendant: Brian D. Netter, Michelle R. Bennett, Rachael L. Westmoreland, Kate Talmor, Jody Lowenstein, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC for defendants.
Case Number: D69446
U.S. Department of Health and Human Service's guidance regarding the 340B drug program violated the Administrative Procedure Act due to lack of notice-and-comment where guidance materially altered obligations of drugmakers under the 340B program and constituted a final agency decision.
Publication Date: 2021-05-12
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: Consulting | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Richard M. Beck, Craig E. Rushmore, Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Brad D. Sorrels, Jessica A. Hartwell, Nora M. Crawford, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, PC, Wilming-ton, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69395
Failure of a transaction to meet the requirements of an earnout provision did not entitle plaintiff to relief, so the court granted defendant's motion to dismiss claims for breach of contract, reformation and declaratory relief.
Publication Date: 2021-05-05
Practice Area: Creditors' and Debtors' Rights
Industry: Financial Services and Banking
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bibas
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ricky R. Franklin, Stockbridge, GA, pro se plaintiff.
for defendant: Joelle Eileen Polesky, Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: D69384
Supreme Court's striking down of the government debt exception to Telephone Consumer Protection Act ban on robocalls as unconstitutional rendered the law void, such that defendant could not rely on that law to avoid liability.
Publication Date: 2021-05-05
Practice Area: Personal Injury
Industry: Federal Government
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bibas
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael I. Silverman, Silverman, McDonald & Friedman, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Dylan J. Steinberg, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: D69389
Family members who were injured when a mail truck rear-ended them provided sufficient notice of their claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act. However, another family member failed to present his loss of con-sortium claim, so the court granted the motion to dismiss that claim.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read