Cases

OPINION ROTH, Circuit Judge: The antitrust laws are concerned with “the protection of competition, not *399 competitors.” 1 Eisai complains that the conduct of Sanofi Aventis U.S., LLC, and Sanofi U.S. Services, Inc

565 F.Supp. 931 (1983) SANOFI, S.A. and American Home Products Corporation, Plaintiffs, v. MED-TECH VETERINARIAN PRODUCTS, INC., J.A. Webster, Inc., as Agent for Med-Tech Veterinarian Products, A.J. Buck & Son, Inc., as Agent for Med-Tech Veterinarian Products, Inc., J.A. Webster, Inc., and A.J. Buck & Son, Inc. Civ. No. 82-1302. United States District Court, D. New Jersey.

*391MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Castel, United States District Judge Plaintiffs Meitav DS Provident Funds and Pension Ltd. (“Meitav”) and Joel Mof-senson bring this putative class action on behalf of all persons who purchased Sanofl American Depositary Shares (“ADS”) between February 7, 2013 and October 29, 2014 (the “Class Period”). They allege that defenda

607 F.Supp.2d 769 (2009) SANOFI-AVENTIS DEUTSCHLAND GmbH, Plaintiff, v. GENENTECH, INC. and Biogen Idec, Inc., Defendant. Civil Action No. 9:08-CV-203. United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Lufkin Division. March 19, 2009. *771 Jim Mitchell Smith, Lawrence Louis Germer, Germer Gertz, L.L.P., Beaumont, TX, Aaron F. Barkoff, Al

OPINION AND ORDER RONNIE ABRAMS, District Judge: Plaintiff RCJV Holdings, Inc. (“RCJV”) brings this breach of contract action against Collado Ryerson, S.A. de C.V. (“Collado”), and Coryer, S.A. de C.V. (“Co-ryer”), to recover $2,655,000 plus interest allegedly owed by Collado on a promissory note and by Coryer as guarantor of Colla-do’s obligations under that note. Defendants claim that the promis

KEARSE, Circuit Judge: Plaintiff Oliver Schools, Inc., doing business as The Stratford Schools (“Oliver”), appeals from a final judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York, Thomas J. McAvoy, Judge, dismissing its complaint brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) to challenge the termination by defendants New York State Higher Education Services Corporation (“HESC”) et at o

930 F.2d 248 19 Fed.R.Serv.3d 683, 67 Ed. Law Rep. 73 OLIVER SCHOOLS, INC., doing business as The StratfordSchools, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Cornelius J. FOLEY, Ph.D., as President of the New YorkState Higher Education Services Corporation; GilbertHarwood, Milton G. Wright, Robert E. Butler and Joseph A.Bradley, the Officers and/or Employees of the New York StateHigher Education Services Corpor

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ VERSATA DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC., Appellant v. SAP AMERICA, INC., SAP AG, Appellees UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, DIRECTOR OF THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, Intervenor ______________________ 2014-1194

ON MOTION ORDER Upon consideration of George Pieczen-ik’s unopposed motion to dismiss Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. et al. from this appeal, It Is Ordered That: The motion is granted. The revised official caption is reflected above.

ON MOTION PER CURIAM. ORDER The Defendants-Appellees move to dismiss George Pieczenik’s appeals. Pieczen-ik opposes. Pieczenik has appealed from orders denying his motion “in limine to expunge plaintiffs copyright lecture proffered by defendants’ counsel and to charge them with digital copyright infringement,” denying his motion for mediation, and his motion fo

565 F.3d 1018 (2009) GCIU-EMPLOYER RETIREMENT FUND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The GOLDFARB CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. No. 08-3229. United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Argued April 2, 2009. Decided May 11, 2009. *1020 David S. Allen (argued), Stellato & Schwartz, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff-App

PER CURIAM. Plaintiff-appellant Ram Z. Porat appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Preska, J.), dismissing his federal claims on the merits, and dismissing his state-law claims without prejudice to renewal in state court. Porat contends the district court erred in dismissing his federal claims and abused its discretion in failing to grant him leave to amend

646 F.3d 1357 (2011) TESSERA, INC., Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, Appellee, and Elpida Memory, Inc. and Elpida Memory (USA) Inc., Intervenors, and Smart Modular Technologies, Inc., Intervenor, and Acer, Inc., Acer America Corporation, Nanya Technology Corporation, Nanya Technology Corporation U.S.A., and PowerChip Semiconductor Corporation (now known as Powerchip Technology Corporation), Intervenors, and Ramaxel Te

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER John Z. Lee, United States District Judge Plaintiffs Carl Lowe and Kearby Kaiser (“Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, have brought this action against CVS Pharmacy, Inc., Min-uteClinic, LLC, and West Corporation (“Defendants”). Plaintiffs’ claims arise under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 42 U.S.C. § 227 et seq., and th

SUMMARY ORDER This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court, entered August 2, 2007, dismissing plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to adequately plead scienter. Plaintiffs offer two arguments on appeal: (1) 'the SAC adequately sets forth particularized allegations of scienter; and (2) even if the allegations in the SAC were too general, t

536 F.3d 757 (2008) CITADEL GROUP LIMITED, a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WASHINGTON REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, an Arkansas Non-Profit Corporation, Defendant-Appellee. No. 07-2638. United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Argued February 26, 2008. Decided August 5, 2008. *758 John H. Anders

SUMMARY ORDER This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court, entered August 2, 2007, dismissing plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to adequately plead scienter. Plaintiffs offer two arguments on appeal: (1) 'the SAC adequately sets forth particularized allegations of scienter; and (2) even if the allegations in the SAC were too general, t

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 20-1595 ATLAS GLASS & MIRROR, INC., Plaintiff, Appellant, v. TRI-NORTH BUILDERS, INC., Defendant, Appellee. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. George A. O'Toole, Jr., U.S. District Judge]

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER SARIS, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION The question raised in these related remand motions is whether a new Supreme Court decision can be an “order or other paper from which it may first be ascertained” that a case is removable under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b). Plaintiffs Illinois, Kentucky and New York brought these seven actions in various state courts alleging t

464 F.3d 274 Ram Z. PORAT, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.LINCOLN TOWERS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, Bonafice Bulloy, Fnu Perry, Thomas McNamara, Richard Lopez, New York City Police Officer Richard Lopez, individually and in his official capacity, John Does 1-4, Police Officer John Doe 5, individually and in his official capacity, John Doe Corporation 1-2, and The City of New York, Defendant-Appellees.Docket No. 05-1631-CV. U