Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
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.
Publication Date: 2023-08-21
Practice Area: Products Liability
Industry: Manufacturing | Pharmaceuticals
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Davis
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas G. Macauley, Macauley LLC, Wilmington, DE; Martin Bienstock, Bienstock PLLC, Washington, D.C. for plaintiff.
for defendant: James J. Freebery, Daniel J. Brown, Makenzie Windfelder, Hayley J. Reese, Chelsea A. Botsch, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Arthur E. Brown, William Hoffman, Matthew Douglas, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, New York, NY; Amy K. Fisher, Katherine D. Althoff, Carolyn E. Riggs, Ice Miller LLP, Indianapolis, IN; Philip A. Rovner, Jonathan A. Choa, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sherry Knutson, Tucker Ellis LLP, Chicago, IL; Craig A. Thompson, Venable LLP, Baltimore, MD for defendants.
Case Number: N17C-07-001 PPI
Plaintiff brought the underlying personal injury action against defendants alleging that defendants were responsible for developing, manufacturing, marketing, and distributing proton pump inhibitor products that were unsafe, defectively designed, lacked proper warnings, and were unfit to be marketed and sold in the United States. Defendants individually and collectively moved to dismiss the claims. Plaintiff brought the case as administrator of a health care plan directly and as subrogee of its members' claims for a variety of injurie
Publication Date: 2023-08-14
Practice Area: Creditors' and Debtors' Rights
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Real Estate
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Brennan
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Janet Charlton, Michael Pak, McCabe, Weisberg & Conway, LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Robert J. Valihura, Morton, Valihura & Zerbato, LLC, Greenville DE for defendant.
Case Number: N20L-10-029 DJB
Although mortgagor should have been noticed in second foreclosure action filed against purchaser at first sheriff's sale, the mortgagor's failure to participate in prior foreclosure action and purchaser being placed on constructive notice of potential mortgage liens on the property meant no interested party was prejudiced by the defect.
Publication Date: 2023-08-14
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Chemicals and Materials
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Ambro
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Maureen Farrell, Adam T. Muery, Muery & Farrell, Austin, TX for appellants
for defendant: David J. Baldwin, Berger Harris, Wilmington, DE; Irving M. Geslewitz, Edward D. Shapiro, Much Law, Chicago, IL for appellees.
Case Number: 22-2181
District court erred in ordering arbitration where dispute resolution clause imposing narrow scope of review of solely factual issues during a short window of time indicated that the dispute resolution provision constituted an expert determination rather than an arbitration.
Publication Date: 2023-08-14
Practice Area: Environmental Law
Industry: Energy | Federal Government
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Smith
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Andrew C. Simpson, Andrew C. Simpson Law Offices, Christiansted, VI for petitioner.
for defendant: Todd S. Kim, Heather E. Gange, United States Department of Justice Environment & Natural Resources Division, Washington, DC for respondent.
Case Number: 23-1094
EPA's "reactivation" policy deeming a shut-down facility as "new" upon resumption of operations improperly extended scope of Prevention of Significant Deterioration program under the Clean Air Act, which expressly applied only to new and modified facilities.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: KENNETH DEL VECCHIO
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2023-08-14
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Manufacturing
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Rennie
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Richard P. Rollo, Travis S. Hunter, Jordan L. Cramer, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Sean J. Bellew, Bellew LLC, Wilmington, DE; Chris L. Gilbert, Gilbert PC, Dallas, TX for defendant.
Case Number: N20C-10-231- SKR CCLD
Ruling that under Delaware law a person is presumed to act in good faith unless evidence is presented to the contrary, the court ruled that defendant had not demonstrated that plaintiff was motivated by bad faith and had, thus, breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing under the terms of their contract. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment granted.
Publication Date: 2023-08-14
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Pharmaceuticals
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Rennie
Attorneys: For plaintiff: John Harris, Esquire, Harry Shenton IV, Berger Harris LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: John Klein, Tampa, FL, pro se defendant.
Case Number: N20C-03-300 SKR CCLD
The court ruled that it did not need to reach an offensive collateral estoppel analysis because plaintiff had carried its burden of proof for summary judgment on the merits demonstrating a breach of the indemnification agreement at issue.
Publication Date: 2023-08-14
Practice Area: Tax
Industry: Federal Government | Manufacturing | Pharmaceuticals
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Jordan
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Clint Carpenter, Arthur T. Catterall, United States Department of Justice Tax Division, Washington, DC; Emily J. Giometti, Cincinnati, OH; Lisa M. Rodriguez, Office of District Council, Internal Revenue Service, Newark, NJ; Mary H. Weber, Internal Revenue Service Office of Chief Counsel, Cincinnati, OH for appellant.
for defendant: Gregory G. Garre, Eric Konopka, Latham & Watkins, Washington, DC; Bryan M. Killian, William F. Nelson, James G. Steele, III, Morgan Lewis & Bockius, Washington, DC for appellee.
Case Number: 22-1193
Legal expenses incurred by generic drug manufacturers to defend against patent infringement lawsuits were tax-deductible where they were ordinary and necessary business expenses as patent litigation was separate from the FDA approval process for ANDAs.
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.
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.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read