Cases

EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judge: The corporate defendants Reconversion Technologies of Texas Incorporated (“Re-tex”), Reconversion Technologies Incorporated (“Retek”), and Progressive Capital Corporation (“Progressive”), and the individual defendants David Gordon, Ira Rim-er, Joel Holt, and Richard Clark, appeal the district court’s final judgment. We reverse the judgment of the

RESTANI, Judge: Appellee Gaia House Mezz LLC (“Gaia”) and State Street were bound by a mezzanine loan 1 agreement for the construction of a residential building in Manhattan. After a difference over monies owed, Gaia initiated this action, alleging principles of equity prevented State Street from demanding payment of ap

OPINION MARC W. BROWN, Justice. Appellants Gaia Environmental, Inc. and AXL Industries, L.L.C. brought claims against appellees James B. Galbraith and McLeod, Alexander, Powel & Apffel, P.C. (“MAPA”) for tortious interference with a prospective business relationship, tortious interference with an existing contract, civil conspiracy, and aiding and ab

130 F.3d 1305 45 U.S.P.Q.2d 1146 MINNESOTA MINING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Appellant,v.RAUH RUBBER, INC.; Gaia Enterprises, Inc.; James T. Rauh;and James Thomas, Appellees.Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, Appellee,v.Rauh Rubber, Inc.; Gaia Enterprises, Inc.; and James T.Rauh, Appellants. Nos. 97-1018MN, 97-1019MN. United St

LYNCH, Circuit Judge. The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. , sets federal minimum-wage, maximum-hour, and overtime guarantees. When an employer fails to meet these requirements, the FLSA gives employees a private right

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FoR THE DISTRICT oF CoLUMBIA F I L E D UNITED sTATEs oF AMERICA, ) FEB 2 0 2013 Plaintiff, § c(i':iié idrs£h[iisbi;irts§igi'ii:\iiiiia v. § Civil Case No. 17-2511 (RJL) AT&T INC., ex al., § Defendants. § -¢H/ MEMoRANDUM oPlNIoN AND oRDER (February _Zg, 2018) On November 2(), 2017, the United States, acting through the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division (“plaintiff’ or “the Government”), brought this action to enjoin the merger of defendants AT&T/DirecTV

Liam O'Grady, United States District Judge This lawsuit arises from an ownership dispute regarding Bob Ross's intellectual property and right of publicity. Both parties filed motions for summary judgment. The motions were fully briefed, and the Court heard oral argument on September 7, 2018. Upon consideration of the pleadings, the oral arguments, and the evidence in the record, the Court concluded that summary judgment for Defendan

OPINION & ORDER DENISE COTE, United States District Judge This patent infringement action arises out of a licensing agreement in which the patent holder, in exchange for a one-time payment, granted a non-exclusive license that allowed the licensee and the licensee’s affiliates to buy and sell the patented goods without restriction. The parties now dispute the éffectiveness of a retroactive sublicense

Case: 24-1407 Document: 63 Page: 1 Filed: 12/10/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ GAME PLAN, INC., Appellant v. UNINTERRUPTED IP, LLC, Appellee ______________________ 2024-1407 ______________________ Appeal from the United S

718 F.Supp.2d 1299 (2010) NEXMED HOLDINGS, INC., Plaintiff, v. BETA TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and Chester Heath, Defendants. Case No. 2:06-CV-1014-TC-DN. United States District Court, D. Utah, Central Division. March 17, 2010. *1303 Joseph M. Kuo, Matthew D. Kellam, Talivaldis Cepuritis, Olson & Cepuritis Ltd., Chicago, IL, Wallace

Even assuming that Precision is correct in its argument that the requirements of New York law are satisfied by the third-party defendants' business activities in New York, Precision has not made sufficient allegations to support the notion that an assertion of general jurisdiction here would comply with due process requirements post- Daimler . It is undisputed that neither Cold Creek nor Hitachi Vantara is incorporated in New York, and that neither

VANESSA D. GILMORE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Pending before the Court are Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant GE Betz, Inc., d/b/a GE Water & Process Technologies ("GE" or "Plaintiff")'s Motions for Summary Judgment on Defendants' counterclaims for business disparagement (Instrument No. 71 ) and tortious interference with customer contracts (Instrument No. 72 ) and employment contracts (

511 F.Supp.2d 676 (2007) TRIPLE TEE GOLF, INC., Plaintiff, v. NIKE, INC., et al., Defendants. No. 4:04-CV-302-A. United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Fort Worth Division. August 10, 2007. *677 Edward E. Casto, Jr., Jonathan T. Suder, Lauren M. Lockett, Friedman Suder & Cooke, Fort Worth, TX, Melvin K. Silverman, Silverma

OPINION AND ORDER MICHAEL R. BARRETT, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Defendants Diversified Employment Solutions’ and Cornerstone Innovations Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss or Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 7). Plaintiff Matthew Bracken has filed a response in opposition to the motion to dismiss (Doc. II),1 and Defendants Diversified Employment Soluti

347 F.Supp.2d 579 (2004) PINPOINT, INC., Plaintiff, v. AMAZON.COM, INC., et al., Defendants. No. 03 C 4954. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division. December 6, 2004. *580 Fred H. Bartlit, Jr., Philip Scott Beck, Mark Edward Ferguson, Peter Benjamin Bensinger, Jr., Shawn F. Fagan, Mark S. Ouweleen, Rebecca W

OPINION AND ORDER MELINDA HARMON, District Judge. Pending before the Court in the above referenced cause, alleging in a Third Amended Complaint (instrument # 169) misappropriation of trade secrets, civil conspiracy for the alleged misappropriation, and copyright infringement and seeking a permanent injunction and declaratory judgment, are inter alia the following “renewed” motions for

619 F.3d 811 (2010) Melinda R. FISHER, Appellant, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC.; Wal-Mart Stores East, LP; Officer James F. Junkin; Sergeant Dale Loney, Appellees. Nos. 09-2696, 09-3488. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: February 9, 2010. Filed: September 1, 2010. *813 J. Michael Cronan, J. Mi

EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judge: Defendant-Appellant California Pools, Inc. appeals the judgment of the district court based on a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff-appellee C.P. Interests, Inc., finding that C.P. Interests had remote junior user rights to the trademark “California Pools” in the Houston area, that California Pools had infringed those rights, and that California P

Justice Green joined by Chief Justice Hecht, Justice Johnson, and Justice Willett, dissenting. The Court holds that Cantey Hanger conclusively established its affirmative defense of attorney immunity because its alleged conduct occurred within the scope of its representation of Simenstad in the divorce proceeding. 467 S.W.3d 477, 480. While I agree with much of the Court’s description of the attorney immunity doc

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO . 13-0861 444444444444 CANTEY HANGER, LLP, PETITIONER, v. PHILIP GREGORY BYRD, LUCY LEASING CO., L.L.C., AND PGB AIR , INC., RESPONDENTS 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444