Cases

MEMORANDUM & ORDER PATEL, District Judge. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Approval of Hoffmann-La Roche Notice On September 5, 2006 plaintiffs Roy Adams (“Adams”), Robert Eggert (“Eg-gert”), Michael Ferris (“Ferris”), Ed Hall (“Hall”) and Rohit Singh (“Singh”) (collectively “plaintiffs”) filed this putative collective action against defendant Inter-Con Security Systems (“Inter-Co

OPINION CHAGARES, Circuit Judge. We are called upon once again to address litigation arising out of a tax avoidance scheme devised in the late 1980s. 1 Defendant James Barrett, a financial planner, induced the plaintiffs, four small New Jersey corporations and their respective owners, to adopt an e

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ ERICSSON, INC., TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON, AND WI-FI ONE, LLC, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. D-LINK SYSTEMS, INC., NETGEAR, INC., ACER, INC., ACER AMERICA CORPORATION, AND GATEWAY, INC., Defendants-Appellants, AND DELL, INC., Defendant-Appellant, AND TOSHIBA AMER

ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE JON D. LEVY, District Judge. The United States Magistrate Judge filed his Recommended Decision (ECF No. 124) with the court on April 1, 2014, pursu*449ant to 28 U.S.C. § 686(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). The defendant filed Objections to the Recommended Decision

OPINION Holly Kirby delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Sharon G. Lee, C.J., and Cornelia A. Clark, Gary R. Wade, and Jeffrey S. Bivins, JJ,, joined. Petitioner Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) brought this action to' set aside a tax sale of real property. MERS argues that t

Fossella v Adams (2024 NY Slip Op 00891) Fossella v Adams 2024 NY Slip Op 00891 Decided on February 21, 2024 Appellate Division, Second Department Wooten, J. Published by New York State Law Reporting Burea

PER CURIAM: These consolidated cases arise from a copyright dispute between General Universal Systems, Inc. (“GUS”) and HAL, Inc. GUS sued HAL, two of its officers, and several of HAL’s customers claiming that HAL infringed its copyright in a freight packaging software system, misappropriated related trade secrets, violated the Lanham Act, and breached a contract with Joe Lopez.

Case: 21-1662 Document: 68 Page: 1 Filed: 02/14/2023 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ CODY L. ADAMS, ROSE M. ADAMSON, JOSEPH P. AGIUS, DARA W. ALLICK, JENNIFER A. ANGEL, MICHAEL T. ANGELO, SAMMY APONTE, ALICIA K. AUSTIN-ZITO, LUKE M. BADARACCO, CHAD J. BARGSTEIN, ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellants v. UNITED STATES,

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 20-1446 _____________ LABMD INC., Appellants v. ROBERT J. BOBACK; ERIC D. KLINE; TIVERSA HOLDING CORP.; _______________ On Appeal from the United States District Cou

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit __________________________ MCKESSON TECHNOLOGIES INC. (formerly McKesson Information Solutions, LLC), Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EPIC SYSTEMS CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. __________________________ 2010-1291 __________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the No

156 T.C. No. 2 UNITED STATES TAX COURT ADAMS CHALLENGE (UK) LIMITED, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 4816-15. Filed January 21, 2021. P is a U.K. corporation whose sole income-producing asset for the years at issue was a multipurpose support vessel. The vessel was chartered by a U.S. firm to assist in decommissioning oil and gas wells and removing debris on po

MEMORANDUM OPINION JOHN A. GIBNEY, JR., District Judge. The essence of this case is a familiar one: a business deal soured by funding problems during an economic recession. At its inception, the deal was marked by optimism and cooperation between the parties. Negotiations culminated in the Contractor Confidentiality, Invention Rights, Exclusivity and Non-Compete Agreement (the “Invention Rights

OPINION APPLIES TO BOTH ACTIONS DEBEVOISE, Senior District Judge: Moving to dismiss Plaintiffs claims, pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, Defendants essentially maintain that Plaintiffs failed to state a plausible claim against them simply because Defendants are high-ranking supervising officials, and Plaintiffs’ facts lack the particulari

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2017 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr

Military Pay; Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record; 10 U.S.C. § 1201; 10 U.S.C. § 1216a; Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD); 38 C.F.R. Part 4; 38 C.F.R. § 4.124a. OPINION HORN, J. Plaintiff, Erie F. Adams, filed suit in the United States Court of Federal Claims claiming that he “has b

Opinion of the Court by GINOZA, J. Plaintiffs-Appellants Mark K. Adams (Adams), Joanie Adams, Nelson Koon Sung Ng (Ng), and Zinnia K.L. Ng (collectively “Plaintiffs”) appeal from a Revised Final Judgment filed on July 14, 2010 by the Circuit Court of the First Circuit (circuit court)1 which entered judgment in favor of Defendants-Appellees Dole Food Company, Inc. and Dole Fresh Frui

MEMORANDUM OPINION T.S. ELLIS, III, District Judge This is the latest in the recent series of constitutional challenges to the National Security Agency’s (“NSA”) data gathering efforts.1 In this case, plaintiffs, nine organizations that communicate over the Internet, allege that the NSA’s interception, collection, review, and storing of plaintiffs’ Internet communic

USCA11 Case: 18-13592 Document: 304-1 Date Filed: 12/30/2022 Page: 1 of 150 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 18-13592 ____________________ DREW ADAMS, a minor, by and th

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 17-1228C (Bid Protest) (Filed: February 9, 2018)1 ***************************** * Post-Award Bid Protest; WALDEN SECURITY, * Supplementation of * Adminis