17 Morris James Attorneys Named In Best Lawyers in America® 2012 in 20 Practice Areas

Seventeen Morris James attorneys are listed as being among the most elite lawyers in their practices in The Best Lawyers in America® 2012.

The Best Lawyers in America® has become universally regarded as the definitive guide to legal excellence. Their rigorous research is based on an exhaustive peer-review where leading attorneys cast votes on the legal abilities of other lawyers in their practice areas.

The Morris James attorneys listed in the 18th edition of the guide and the areas of law in which they are recognized include:

Richard P. Beck
Litigation – Real Estate (1983)
Real Estate Law (1983)

John M. Bloxom IV
Real Estate Law (2010)

P. Clarkson Collins, Jr.
Corporate Law (2005)
Litigation – Mergers and Acquisitions (2005)

Mary M. Culley
Elder Law (2008)

Keith E. Donovan
Personal Injury Litigation (2009)

Dennis D. Ferri
Medical Malpractice Law (2007)
Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants (2007)

Richard Galperin
Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants (2005)

Richard K. Herrmann
Information Technology Law (2003)
Technology Law (2003)

Francis J. Jones, Jr.
Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants (2008)
Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs (2008)

Gretchen S. Knight
Family Law (2007)

Lewis H. Lazarus
Commercial Litigation (2006)
Corporate Law (2006)
Litigation – Mergers and Acquisitions (2006)

Mary B. Matterer
Litigation – Intellectual Property (2009)

Edward M. McNally
Corporate Law (2005)
Litigation – Mergers and Acquisitions (2005)

Mark D. Olson
Tax Law (2011)

James W. Semple
Commercial Litigation (2009)

Bruce W. Tigani
Tax Law (2011)

David H. Williams
Education Law (2007)
Employment Law – Management (2007)
Labor Law – Management (2007)
Litigation – Labor and Employment (2007)

(Year indicates first year listed in practice area)

"Administrating" construed to mean "administering once daily"

Alza Corporation, et al. v. Kremers Urban LLC, et al., C. A. No. 10-23-LPS, August 29, 2011.

Stark, J.  Claim construction issued.

Continue Reading...

Generic version of Oracea® infringes one of the patents-in-suit

The Research Foundation of State University of New York, et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Civ. No. 09-184-LPS, August 26, 2011.

Stark, J.  Plaintiff proved infringement of one of the patents-in-suit by defendant’s generic version of Oracea®. The other four patents-at-issue were found not infringed, and two were found invalid.

Continue Reading...

Material dispute on concealment of prior invention preclude invalidity finding

Solvay, S.A. v. Honeywell Specialty Materials LLC, et al., Civ. No. 06-557-SLR, August 26, 2011.

Robinson, J.  Renewed motion for summary judgment of invalidity pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102(g) is denied, and related motion to leave to file is denied as moot. Motion for summary judgment of no willful infringement is granted. Motion for leave to file motion for summary judgment of invalidity pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) is denied.

Continue Reading...

Jury verdict of no infringement and invalidity upheld

Arcelormittal France, et al. v. AK Steel Corporation, et al., Civ. No. 10-050-SLR, August 25, 2011.

Robinson, J.  Plaintiff’s motion for JMOL new trial is denied. Defendant’s motion for JMOL of noninfringement is denied as moot.

Continue Reading...

Antitrust and sham litigation allegations not supported by the record

Ethypharm S.A. France v. Abbott Laboratories, Civ. No. 08-126-SLR, August 23, 2011.

Robinson, J.  Motion for summary judgment regarding alleged anticompetitive conduct and motion for summary judgment regarding allegations of sham litigation are granted.

Continue Reading...

Standing did not exist to support claim to clarify patent ownership

Silicon Economics, Inc. v. Financial Accounting Foundation, et al., Civil Action 11-163-Baylson, J., August 17, 2011.

Baylson, J. (designated)  Motion to dismiss granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff is given leave to file an amended complaint.

Continue Reading...

Use of evidence in violation of trial practice guidelines warranted new trial

Belden Technologies Inc., et al. v. Superior Essex Communications LP, et al., Civ. No. 08-63-SLR, August 12, 2011.

Robinson, J.  Plaintiff’s motion for JMOL or for a new trial on validity is granted in part and denied in part and its motion for permanent injunction is denied.  Defendants’ renewed motion for JMOL or for new trial on invalidity is also granted in part and denied in part.  The parties’ remaining JMOL motions are denied as moot.

Continue Reading...

Post trial motions are denied in view of evidence before jury

CNH America LLC, et al. v. Kinze Manufacturing, Inc., C. A. No. 08-945-GMS, August 11, 2011.

Sleet, C. J.  Renewed motions for JMOL, new trial, and attorney fees are denied.

Continue Reading...

BAE's remedy is against the U.S. government, not Aeroflex

BAE Systems Information and Electronic Systems Integration Inc. v. Aeroflex Incorporated et al., Civ. No. 09-769-LPS, August 2, 2011 (unsealed August 9, 2011).

Stark, J.  Plaintiff’s motion to strike affidavits filed in support of summary judgment is denied. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement is granted.

Continue Reading...

Amendment of pleadings after the scheduling deadline is not permitted

Asahi Glass Co., LTD., et al. v. Guardian Industries Corp., Civ. No. 09-515-SLR, August 8, 2011.

Robinson, J. Guardian’s motion to amend its affirmative defenses to allege inequitable conduct is denied.

Continue Reading...

Covenants not to sue warranted dismissal of counterclaims

Somaxon Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. v. Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., et al., Civ. No. 11-107-SLR, July 28, 2011.

Robinson, J.  Defendants’ motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for a more definite statement is granted. Counterclaim Counts III through XIV dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Continue Reading...

Common interest privilege is upheld

Xerox Corporation v. Google Inc. and Yahoo! Inc., C. A. No. 10-136-LPS, August 1, 2011.

Stark, J.  Defendants’ motion to compel documents withheld as privileged under the common interest doctrine is denied. Court construes patent terms.

Continue Reading...

Patent is not invalid for obviousness-type double patenting

Eli Lilly and Company, et al. v. Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc., et al., Civ. No. 08-335-GMS, July 28, 2011.

Sleet, C. J.  Post-trial findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Continue Reading...

Transfer denied where patents in first-filed case are unrelated

NETGEAR, Inc. v. Ruckus Wireless, Inc., Civ. No. 10-999-SLR, July 28, 2011.

Robinson, J.  Motion to transfer is denied.

Continue Reading...