Rembrandt Technologies, L.P. v. Harris Corporation ,Del. Super., C.A. No. 07C-09-059-JRS, May 22 , 2009.
Slights J. Defendant’s Motion to Stay is granted pending the entry of a final order on the Markman ruling in the multi-district federal patent litigation.
Continue Reading...Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Intl. Inc., et al., Civ. No. 08-309-LPS, December 19, 2008.
Stark, M. J. Defendants’ motion to stay the litigation pending reexamination is denied.
Continue Reading...St. Clair Intellectual Propety Consultants, Inc. v. Fujifilms Holding Corporation, et al., Civ. No. 08-373-LPS, January 27, 2009.
Stark, M.J. Defendants’ motion to stay second action pending appeal of first related action is denied.
Continue Reading...Callaway Golf Company v. Acushnet Company, Civ. No. 06-091-SLR, November 10, 2008.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s post-trial motion for JMOL or a new trial following jury verdict on validity is denied. Plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction is granted by separate order and stay of that order pending appeal is denied.
Continue Reading...McKesson Automation, Inc. v. Swisslog Italia S.P.A., et al., Civ. No. 06-28-SLR/LPS, November 5, 2008.
Robinson, J. Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of standing is stayed. Other pending motions are denied without prejudice to renew.
Continue Reading...In Re: Brimonidine Patent Litigation, MDL Docket No. 07-md-1866 GMS, October 31, 2008.
Sleet, C.J. Plaintiff’s motion to stay the action against Excela and toll the 30-month stay, and for leave to use information produced under the protective order in a citizen’s petition to the FDA is denied.
Continue Reading...Becton Dickinson and Company v. Tyco Healthcare Group LP, C.A. No. 02-1694a-GMS, October 29, 2008.
Sleet, C.J. Plaintiff’s post-trial motions for an award for damages and prejudgment interest is granted. Plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction is granted in part and denied in part.
Continue Reading...Amgen, Inc., et al. v. Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 06-259-MPT, October 3, 2008.
Thynge, M.J. Magistrate grants defendants’ motion for judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b) and stays plaintiffs’ invalidity and unenforceability claims and defenses pending disposition of the appeal.
Continue Reading...Robinson, J. Court stays state law claims of indirect purchasers and counterclaim plaintiffs in Tricor action. Defendants' motions for summary judgment on state law claims are likewise denied without prejudice. Defendants’ motions for summary judgment on relevant market definition are denied. Defendants’ motion for leave to file a motion for summary judgment on antitrust injury is denied.
Continue Reading...Farnan, J. Court denies defendants’ motion to stay pending resolution of motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction since any efforts taken (including discovery) could be useful in declaratory judgment action pending in Northern District of California between same parties.
Continue Reading...Robinson, J. Court denies plaintiffs’ motion to supplement record and grants request for certification of appealability in two antitrust actions.
Time Warner Cable v. GPNE Corp., C.A. No. 07-67-MPT, July 20, 2007.
Thynge, M.J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss in light of prior pending action was granted. The motion to stay or transfer was denied as moot.
Continue Reading...Knova Software, Inc. et al. v. Inquira, Inc., No. 067-381-JJF, Apr. 27, 2007.
Farnan, J. Defendant's motion to dismiss claims of intentional interference with prospective economic relationships and unfair competition was granted. Motion to dismiss unjust enrichment claim was denied.
Continue Reading...
Zoetics, Inc. et al., v. Yahoo!, Inc., No. 06-108-JJF, July 6, 2006.
Farnan, J. Motion to stay action and transfer is denied. Despite the fact that New York would be more convenient for the witnesses, and the bankruptcy proceedings were pending in New York, the plaintiff’s choice of forum was paramount.
Continue Reading...
Sony Electronics, Inc. et al. v. Orion IP, LLC, No. 05-255-GMS, Mar. 14, 2006.
Sleet, J. Motion to dismiss or stay under first-filed rule is granted in part and denied in part. Claims of plaintiff who was a party to Texas action were severed and transferred.
Farnan, J. Motion to dismiss claims against individual defendants for improper venue granted. Defendants’ motion to dismiss or stay is granted.
Continue Reading...Enter keywords:
For more information concerning any of these cases, contact Mary Matterer at mmatterer@morrisjames.com or 302.888.6960
