Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION DEBORAH K. CHASANOW, District Judge. Presently pending and ready for review in this declaratory judgment action are several motions, including: (1) the motion of Plaintiff Innovative Therapies, Inc. (“ITI” or “Plaintiff’) for a protective order (ECF No. 21); (2) Plaintiffs motion to modify a subpoena (ECF No. 24); (3) the motion of Defendant Mark S. Meents (“Meents” or “Defendant”) for ext

ORDER Amy Totenberg, United States District Judge This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff David Hill’s- Motion to Remand [Doc. 8] and Defendants Apto Solutions, Inc. (“Apto”) and Christopher Re’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction [Doc. 4]. Plaintiff originally brought this suit in the Magistrate Court of Fulton County, alleging tortious interference with a contractual relation

RULING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND PLAINTIFFS’ CROSS-MOTION TO COMPEL SWEENEY, Judge. This discovery dispute comes before the court upon Defendant’s Motion for Protective Order to Preclude the Taking of a Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition on Certain Topics (“motion”) and Plaintiffs’ Cross-Motion to Compel the United States to Identify and Produce a Rule 30(b)(6) Designee(s) on Certain To

J. P. Stadtmueller, U.S. District Court This is a patent case about lithium-ion batteries used in power tools. The case was tried to a jury in October 2017. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of Plaintiffs and awarded nearly $28 million in damages. Before the Court are the parties' post-trial motions. For the reasons stated below, the Court will deny post-trial relief to Defendant Snap-On Incorporated ("Snap-On"), deny Plaintiffs' motion f

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 11-268C (Originally filed: August 31, 2021)1 (Re-filed: October 22, 2021) ********************** SECURITYPOINT HOLDINGS, INC., 28 U.S.C. § 1498(a) Plaintiff, (Jurisdiction Over Patent Claims); Post-trial decision; v.

In the United States Court of Federal Claims SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP., Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, No. 17-cv-825 Defendant, Filed: August 6, 2021 and MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Intervenor-Defendant, and L3 TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

Maryland Department of the Environment v. Assateague Coastal Trust, No. 11, September Term 2022, Opinion by Booth, J. Environmental Law – Administrative Law – Clean Water Act – Maryland Water Pollution Control Laws. Under the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1251, et seq. and Maryland’s water pollution control law, Title 9, Subtitle 3 of the Environment Article of the Maryland Code, the Maryland Department of the Environment (“Department”) has the authority to issue general discharge permits upon

ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE *677On November 29, 2017, the Court held an oral hearing to determine the proper construction of the disputed claim terms of the patents-in-suit. Having considered the parties claim-construction briefing and based on the intrinsic and extrinsic evidence, the Court construes the disputed te

APPEL, Justice (dissenting). Under article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution, can a police officer use a common minor traffic violation as an after-the-fact pretext to seize a vehicle and its passengers when the actual reason for the stop was constitutionally inadequate? Today's majority says yes. I say NO! I. Summary. History demonstrates that one of the fundamental purpos

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _______________________ Nos. 20-1749 and 20-1766 _______________________ GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS, Appellant in No. 20-1766 v. THE GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS; COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS,

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ CLS BANK INTERNATIONAL, Plaintiff-Appellee, AND CLS SERVICES LTD., Counterclaim Defendant-Appellee, v. ALICE CORPORATION PTY. LTD., Defendant-Appellant. ______________________ 2011-1301 ______________________

OPINION AND ORDER SWEENEY, Judge. This post-award bid protest action is before the court on the parties’ cross-motions for judgment on the administrative record pursuant to Rule 52.1 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”). Plaintiff, Westech International, Inc. (‘Westech” or “plaintiff’), challenges an award to PAI Corporation (“PAI”), under a solicitation issued by

Re Document Nos.: 114, 116, 119, 128 MEMORANDUM OPINION Granting In Part and Denying In Part Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment; Granting In Part and Denying In Part Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment; Denying Defendant’s Motion to Strike; and Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion In Limine RUDOLPH CONTRERAS,

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA No. 17–0367 Filed June 28, 2019 STATE OF IOWA, Appellee, vs. SCOTTIZE DANYELLE BROWN, Appellant. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Nathan A. Callahan, District Associate Judge. The defendant challenges her conviction for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated under Iowa Code section 321J.2 (2017), arguing she was subjected to an

796 F.Supp.2d 1025 (2011) VOLTERRA SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. PRIMARION, INC., et al., Defendants. Case No. C-08-05129 JCS. United States District Court, N.D. California. May 4, 2011. *1035 Brian Joseph Keating, James W. Morando, Jeffrey M. Fisher, John L. Cooper, Racheal Turner, Farella Braun & Martel LLP, San

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE ARXADA HOLDINGS NA INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2024-0771-JTL ) MICHAEL HARVEY, AARON HARVEY, ) PHIL HARVEY, CAPACITY CHEMICAL, ) LLC, and BLUETECH LABORATORIES, ) INC.,

ACCEPTED 15-24-00114-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 9/29/2025 4:09 PM No. 15-24-00114-CV

ACCEPTED 12-15-00219-CV TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 11/19/2015 8:06:13 PM

490 F.Supp.2d 1091 (2007) In re WAL-MART WAGE AND HOUR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES Litigation. And All Related Cases. No. 2:06-CV-00225-PMP-PAL. United States District Court, D. Nevada. May 23, 2007. *1092 *1093 *1094 *1095

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 25-1338C (Originally filed under seal: May 4, 2026) (Public version filed: May 12, 2026) ) CSI AVIATION, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE U