Filter This View

  • Genedics, LLC v. Meta Co.

    Publication Date: 2018-09-05
    Practice Area: Intellectual Property | Patent Litigation
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David W. deBruin, The deBruin Firm, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Leslie L. Jacobs, Jr. and Gabriela I. Coman, Rubin and Rudman LLP, Washington, DC, attorneys for plaintiff
    for defendant: David E. Moore, Bindu A. Palapura, and Stephanie E. O'Byrne, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Craig Kaufman, Michael C. Ting, and Fatima Alloo, Techknowledge Law Group LLP, Redwood City, CA, attorneys for defendant.
    Case Number: D68271

    Motion to dismiss patent infringement complaint on grounds of non-patent-eligible subject matter denied where patent claims asserted sufficiently inventive concept overcoming obstacles of systems and processes by using existing components in more than conventional manner.

  • ChyronHego Corp. v. Wight

    Publication Date: 2018-08-15
    Practice Area: Business Torts | Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: A. Thompson Bayliss and E. Wade Houston, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Peter M. Stone, Paul Hastings LLP, Palo Alto, CA, attorneys for plaintiffs
    for defendant: D. McKinley Measley and Daniel T. Menken, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Overton Thompson III and Joseph B. Crace, Jr., Bass Berry & Sims PLC, Nashville, TN, attorneys for defendants.
    Case Number: D68247

    Contractual anti-reliance clause precluded plaintiffs from pleading justifiable reliance in support of claims of extracontractual fraud.

  • Sciabacucchi v. Liberty Broadband Corp.

    Publication Date: 2018-08-08
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kurt M. Heyman, Melissa N. Donimirski, Jason M. Leviton and Joel A. Fleming for plaintiff
    for defendant: Donald J. Wolfe, Jr., Peter J. Walsh, Jr., Brian C. Ralston, Tyler J. Leavengood, Jaclyn C. Levy, Aaron R. Sims and Richard B. Harper for defendants Liberty Broadband, Malone and Maffei; Martin S. Less-ner, David C. McBride, James M. Yoch, Jr., Paul J. Loughman, William Savitt, Anitha Reddy and David Kirk for remaining defendants.
    Case Number: D68243

    A stockholder failed to state any direct claims, but he adequately alleged demand futility and a viable deriva-tive claim for breach of fiduciary duty.

  • Rothschild Mobile Imaging Innovations, LLC v. Mitek Sys., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-08-08
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Sleet
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: D68240

    Defendant's motion for attorney's fees in patent infringement suit after PTAB invalidated asserted claims denied where no evidence plaintiff engaged in vexatious or bad faith litigation to constitute "exceptional" case.

  • Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft Zur Forderung Der Angewandten Forschung e.V. v. Sirius XM Radio Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-08-01
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Fallon
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: D68231

    Motion for leave to amend patent infringement complaint denied as futile where court already determined validity of defendant's sublicense, which acted as a complete defense to infringement.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Massachusetts Legal Ethics & Malpractice 2017

    Authors: James S. Bolan, Sara N. Holden

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Penton Bus. Media Holdings, Inc. v. Informa PLC

    Publication Date: 2018-07-25
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: William M. Lafferty, John P. DiTomo, Coleen Hill, Craig S. Primis, Erin C. Johnston and Matthew S. Brooker for plaintiff
    for defendant: Kevin R. Shannon, Christopher N. Kelly, Jaclyn C. Levy, Anthony M. Candido, Robert C. Myers and Benjamin A. Berringer for defendants.
    Case Number: D68227

    A merger agreement contained specific provisions regarding an expert's role in the dispute resolution process, which precluded consideration of extrinsic evidence.

  • In Re Straight Path Commc'ns Inc. Consolidated Stockholder Litig.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-11
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance | Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ned Weinberger and Thomas Curry, Labaton Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; March Lebovitch, Edward Timlin, John Vielandi, and David MacIsaac, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossman LLP, New York, NY; Vincent R. Cappucci and Joshua K. Porter, Entwistle & Cappucci LLP, New York, NY, attorneys for plaintiffs
    for defendant: Rudolf Koch, Kevin M. Gallagher, Sarah A. Clark, and Anthony M. Calvano, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; William Ohlemeyer, Edward Normand, and Jason Cyrulnik, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, Armonk, NY; Kevin G. Abrams, Michael A. Barlow, and April M. Kirby, Abrams & Bayliss, Wilmington, DE; Greg A. Danilow, Seth Goodchild, and Thomas G. James, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, New York, NY, attorneys for defendants.
    Case Number: D68207

    Claim that controlling stockholder improperly used influence to acquire company asset in exchange for approving sale of the company was a direct claim that could be brought by stockholders since they would have received consideration for the asset but for the controller's conduct.

  • Int'l Bus. Mach., Inc. v. Groupon, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-04
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David E. Moore, Bindu A. Palapura, Stephanie E. O'Byrne, John M. Desmarais, Karim Z. Oussayef, Lau-rie N. Stempler, Robert C. Harris, Brian D. Matty and Michael Matulewicz-Crowley for plaintiff
    for defendant: John G. Day, Andrew C. Mayo, J. David Hadden, Saina S. Shamilov, Phillip J. Haack and Sapna Mehta for defendant.
    Case Number: D68202

    In this patent dispute, genuine issues of material fact existed as to invalidity, obviousness and non-infringement issues, so the court denied summary judgment.

  • Kaavo, Inc. v. Amazon.com Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-04
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stamatios Stamoulis, Richard C. Weinblatt, Sheekhar Vyas, James T. Bailey and Gregory Pollaro for plaintiff
    for defendant: Karen Jacobs, Megan E. Delliger, Alan M. Fisch, R. William Sigler, Jeffrey Saltman and Joseph Edell for defendants.
    Case Number: D68203

    Plaintiff's claims were not patent eligible because they were directed to an abstract idea and nothing in the claims represented an inventive concept.

  • Alarm.com Holdings, Inc. v. ABS Capital Partners, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-06-27
    Practice Area: Contracts | Intellectual Property
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Philip A. Rovner, Jonathan A. Choa, and Alan R. Silverstein, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE, attorneys for plaintiff
    for defendant: Raymond J. DiCamillo, Chad M. Shandler, Matthew W. Murphy, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Steven F. Barley, Andrea W. Trento, Hogan Lovells US LLP, Baltimore, MD, attorneys for defendants.
    Case Number: D68190

    Misappropriation claim failed where only circumstantial evidence involved defendant's investment in competing business, an act it was permitted to do under the parties' agreements.