Cases

506 F.Supp.2d 1022 (2007) ATLANTIC RECORDING CORPORATION, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Amy ELLISON, a/k/a Amy Ellison-Smith, Defendant. Civil Action 06-0787-WS-C. United States District Court, S.D. Alabama, Southern Division. April 16, 2007. *1023 *1024 Thomas C. Anderson, Balch & Bingham, Gulfp

COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE LORI W. WILL LEONARD L. WILLIAMS JUSTICE CENTER VICE CHANCELLOR 500 N. KING STREET, SUITE 11400 WILMINGTON, DELAWARE 19801-3734 November 7, 2022 Stephen C.

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT In re: GENIUS BRANDS No. 22-55760 INTERNATIONAL, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, D.C. No. ______________________________ 2:20-cv-07457- DSF-RAO ALI ALAVI; A LEGACY FOUNDATION, Lead Plaintiffs; On Behalf of Themselves and All Others OPINION Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v.

AMENDED1 ORDER Amy Totenberg, United States District Judge This matter is before the Court on Defendant FOCUS Brands, Inc.’s (“FB”) Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 6]. For the following reasons, the Motion is GRANTED. *1267I. BACKGROUND FACTS At this stage, the facts alleged

OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAM M. CONLEY, District Judge Between 2008 and 2012, Applica Consumer Products, Inc. (“Applica”), received roughly 1,600 reports from U.S. consumers that the carafes distributed as part of its Black & Decker SpaceMaker line of coffeemakers were suddenly cracking, separating and breaking at the handle. Some of these handle failures included reports of burns and lacerations. By vir

(2008) ENERGY BRANDS INC. d/b/a Glacéau, Plaintiff, v. SPIRITUAL BRANDS, INC. and Elicko Taieb, Defendants. No. 07 Civ. 10644(DC). United States District Court, S.D. New York. July 16, 2008. OPINION CHIN, District Judge. Plaintiff Energy Brands Inc., doing business as Glacéau ("Glacéau"), the maker of the popular smartwater and vitamin

*1103ORDER GRANTING IN PART & DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ JOINT CONSOLIDATED MOTION TO DISMISS KENNETH A. MARRA, United States District Judge THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Individual Defendants’ Joint Consolidated Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaints [DE 735].1 The Court has carefully rev

DECISION AND ORDER VICTOR MARRERO, United States District Judge Freeplay Music, LLC (“Freeplay”) brings this action against Gibson Brands, Inc. (“Gibson”) for copyright infringement. (See Dkt. No. 1.) In its complaint, Free-play alleges that Gibson exploited, without a license, five copyrighted sound recordings and compositions available on Free-play’s website by incorporating them into videos, posted, on

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LA INTERNATIONAL CORP.; Nos. 24-3776, MANHATTAN WHOLESALERS, 24-5009, INC.; EXCEL WHOLESALE 24-5227 DISTRIBUTORS, INC.; VALVE D.C. No. DISTRIBUTOR, INC.; AKR 2:18-cv-06809- CORPORATION; U.S. MWF-MRW WHOLESALE OUTLET & DISTRIBUTION,

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAM C. BRYSON, District Judge. Before the Court are five post-trial motions filed by the plaintiffs and one filed by the defendants: (1) Versata’s Motion to Alter or Amend Final Judgment Under Rule 59(e) (Dkt. No. 349); (2) Versata’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law on Invalidity and Infringement (Dkt. No. 350); (3) Versata’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter o

MEMORANDUM OPINION CHARLES R. SIMPSON III, Senior District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss (DN 82) of Defendants Yum! Brands, Inc. (‘Yum!” or the “Company”), David C. Novak, Richard T. Carucci, and Jing-Shyh S. Su (“Individual Defendants”). Defendants request that the Court dismiss the Consolidated Class Action Complaint (“Complaint”) (DN 72) with prejudice for fai

681 F.Supp.2d 985 (2010) William G. FRIEMUTH, Plaintiff, v. FISKARS BRANDS, INC., Defendant. No. 09-cv-494-vis.[1] United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin. February 3, 2010. *987 Randall B. Gold, Fox & Fox, S.C., Monona, WI, Clayton Kawski, Farrah N.W. Rifelj, John Scheller, Michael Best & Friedrich LLP, M

792 F.Supp.2d 1301 (2011) In re CHIQUITA BRANDS INTERNATIONAL, INC. ALIEN TORT STATUTE AND SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION. This Document Relates To: ATS Actions 07-60821-CIV-MARRA, 08-80421-CIV-MARRA, 08-80465-CIV-MARRA, 08-80480-CIV-MARRA, 08-80508-CIV-MARRA, 10-60573-CIV-MARRA, 10-80652-CIV-MARRA. Case No. 08-01916-MD. United States District Court, S.D. Florida. June 3, 2011.<

OPINION STANCEU, Judge: This case arises from decisions of the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC” or the “Commission”) to deny plaintiff Furniture Brands International, Inc. (“Furniture Brands”) status as an “affected domestic producer” (“ADP”) under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 (“CDSOA” or “Byrd Amendment”)

759 F.Supp.2d 363 (2010) IMG FRAGRANCE BRANDS, LLC, Dana Classic Fragrances, Inc., Zohar CDO 2003-1 Limited, Zohar II 2005-1 Limited, Zohar III Limited, and IMG Holdings, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. HOUBIGANT, INC., Etablissement Houbigant, and Michael J. Sherman, Defendants. No. 09 CV 3655(LAP). United States District Court, S.D. New York. December 21, 2010.

MEMORANDUM OPINION ROBINSON, District Judge I. INTRODUCTION On December 9, 2013, plaintiff Courtesy Products, L.L.C. (“Courtesy”) filed a complaint against defendant Hamilton Beach Brands, Inc. (“Hamilton”) alleging direct and indirect infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,311,037 (“the '037 patent”), 7,258,884 (“the '884 patent”), and 7,770,512 (“the '512 patent”). (D.I.l) Presently befo

679 F.Supp.2d 395 (2009) IMG FRAGRANCE BRANDS, LLC, Dana Classic Fragrances, Inc. Zohar CDO 2003-1 Limited, Zohar II 2005-1 Limited, Zohar III Limited, and IMG Holdings, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. HOUBIGANT, INC., Etablissement Houbigant, and Michael J. Sherman, Defendants. Houbigant, Inc. & Etablissement Houbigant, Counter-Plaintiffs, v. IMG Fragrance Brands, LLC, Dana Classic Fragrances, Inc. Zohar CDO 2003-1 Limited, Zohar II 2005-1

458 F.Supp.2d 81 (2006) ISI BRANDS, INC., Plaintiff, v. KCC INTERNATIONAL, INC., Defendant. No. 03 CV 1605(ADS)(WDW). United States District Court, E.D. New York. October 19, 2006. *82 Amster, Rothstein & Ebenstein, LLP, New York City (Chester P. Rothstein, Holly Pekowsky, of counsel), for Plaintiff.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT THOMAS O. RICE, District Judge. BEFORE THE COURT is Plaintiff Atlantic Casualty Insurance Company’s (Atlantic Casualty) Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 26). This matter was submitted for consideration without oral argument. The Court has reviewed the parties’ briefing and the record and files herein, and is fully informed.

690 F.Supp.2d 1296 (2010) In re CHIQUITA BRANDS INTERNATIONAL, INC. ALIEN TORT STATUTE AND SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION. This Document Relates To: ATA Action. Tania Julin, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Chiquita Brands International, Inc. Nos. 08-01916-MD, No. 08-20641-CIV-KAM. United States District Court, S.D. Florida. February 4, 2010.