Cases

ACCEPTED 03-15-00348-CV 6616789 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY ' TIMOTHY J. CORRIGAN, District Judge. After some fits and starts, this patent infringement case is before the Court to determine whether the-two patents at issue — both 'involving “an apparatus and method for providing financial transaction authorization, notification,' and/or security” — are invalid because they are drawn to

Memorandum and order DOUGLAS P. WOODLOCK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Plaintiff Tele-Publishing, Inc. (“TPI”) and defendants .Facebook, Inc. and TheFa-cebook, LLC (collectively “Facebook”) have presented various dispositive motions to resolve this computer program patent dispute. The focus’ of the instant memorandum will be the respective requests for summary disposition regarding the validity of the assert

GRAEFF, J. This appeal involves litigation arising from the death of Dondi Johnson, Sr., after he was arrested for public urination. Appellees, and cross-appellants, Mr. Johnson’s estate and his two sons,1 filed a wrongful death and survivorship action in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City against appellants, Officers Sendy Ferdinand, Michael Riser, and Nicole Leake. A jury found in favor of appe

Matthew W. Brann, United States District Judge MEMORANDUM OPINION I. BACKGROUND This civil rights action has come to be known for all of the wrong reasons. Sad to say, after ten years of protracted - and unnecessarily' contentious litigation, it- appears that all Plaintiffs counsel, Cynthia L. Pollick, Esquire, has managed to accomplish is disrespecting this Court as an institution and em

Eaton, Judge: *1329 In this consolidated action, plaintiff Fine Furniture (Shanghai) Limited ("Fine Furniture" or "plaintiff") moves for judgment on the agency record, challenging the United States Department of Commerce's ("Commerce" or "Department") final results in the third administ

OPINION & ORDER DENISE COTE, District Judge: Table of Contents PROCEDURAL HISTORY.453 BACKGROUND.458 *450[[Image here]] *451[[Image here]]

Justice MIMS, dissenting. I disagree with the majority's conclusion that no assignment of error challenges the circuit court's ruling that the no-contest clause applied only to the changes made in the September 2012 amendment. To the contrary, I believe the trustee presents that challenge in her third assignment of error. I also disagree with the majority's conclusion that the evidence supports the circuit court's

635 F.Supp.2d 46 (2009) ARROW INTERNATIONAL, INC. and Arrow International Investment Corp., Plaintiffs, v. SPIRE BIOMEDICAL, INC., Defendant. Civil Action No. 06-cv-11564-DPW. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. July 10, 2009. *52 Brian E. Whiteley, Carolyn A. Marcotte, Hiscock & Barclay, LLP, Boston, MA, Ira E. S

OPINION DAVID STEWART CERCONE, District Judge. Plaintiff commenced this action seeking redress for defendant North River Insurance Company’s (“defendant”) failure to pay proceeds under an umbrella commercial general liability policy for tendered losses arising out of underlying lawsuits advancing personal injury and wrongful death claims against plaintiff. Presently before the court are motions

IRENAS, Senior District Judge: Plaintiff G & F Graphic Services, Inc., doing business as Inserts East, contracted to purchase from Defendant Graphic Innovators, Inc. (“GI”), a “remanufactured” commercial Harris N400B printing press for $2.7 million. Inserts East asserts that the printing press has never worked correctly, and that Graphic Innovators fraudulently sold it an older, historically problematic N400 model, rather

DECISION AND ORDER RUDOLPH T. RANDA, District Judge. The Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant, Nordock Inc., (“Nordock”), and the Defendant-Counterclaimant, Systems Inc. (“Systems”), are rivals in the loading dock device industry. Both companies design, manufacture, and sell dock levelers which are mechanical devices used to create a bridge between loading dock surfaces and the surfaces of truck load beds

808 F.Supp.2d 417 (2011) NEW YORK STATE ELECTRIC & GAS CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. FIRSTENERGY CORPORATION, Defendant. FirstEnergy Corporation, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. I.D. Booth, Inc., Third-Party Defendant. Civil Action No. 3:03-CV-0438 (DEP). United States District Court, N.D. New York. July 11, 2011. Decision Denying Reconsideration Septemb

655 F.Supp.2d 400 (2009) REICHHOLD, INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES METALS REFINING COMPANY, et al., Defendants. Civ. No. 03-453(DRD). United States District Court, D. New Jersey. June 22, 2009. *403 Epstein Becker & Green, P.C., William A. Ruskin, Esq., Sheila A. Woolson, Esq., Newark, NJ, for Plaintiff Reichhold, Inc.

679 S.E.2d 223 (2008) Hugh M. CAPERTON, Harman Development Corporation, Harman Mining Corporation, and Sovereign Coal Sales, Inc., Plaintiffs Below, Appellees, v. A.T. MASSEY COAL COMPANY, INC., Elk Run Coal Company, Inc., Independence Coal Company, Inc., Marfork Coal Company, Inc., Performance Coal Company, and Massey Coal Sales Company, Inc., Defendants Below, Appellants. No. 33350. Supreme Court of

ACCEPTED 12-14-00220-CV TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 9/4/2015 3:01:53 PM

465 F.Supp.2d 34 (2006) In re CREDIT SUISSE-AOL SECURITIES LITIGATION. Civ. Action No. 02-12146-NG. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. December 7, 2006. *36 Daniel S. Sommers, Steven J. Toll, Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, Washington, DC, Donald R. Hall, Frederic S. Fox, Joel B. Strauss, Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LL