Cases

Filed 6/1/22 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE JANE DOE NO. 1 et al., B310131 Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 19STCV11874) v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., Defendants and Respondents. APPEAL from a judgment of the Supe

MEMORANDUM & ORDER NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS, United States District Judge. Plaintiffs in these two related putative class actions assert claims under New York Labor Law (“NYLL”) and other New York statutory and common law against Uber Technologies, Inc. and a number of related or affiliated entities (collectively, “Uber”). In the first action (the “Mumin Action”), Plaintiffs Manzoor Mu-min and Victor Mallh (

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit __________________________ AKAMAI TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, AND THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LIMELIGHT NETWORKS, INC., Defendant-Cross Appellant. __________________________ 2009-1372, -1380, -1

811 F.Supp.2d 973 (2011) INTERMEC TECHNOLOGIES CORP., Plaintiff, v. PALM INC., Defendant. Civ. No. 07-272-SLR. United States District Court, D. Delaware. September 15, 2011. *978 Jack B. Blumenfeld, Esquire and Rodger Dallery Smith, II, Esquire of Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE, Of Counsel: Carson P. Vea

738 F.Supp.2d 522 (2010) INTERMEC TECHNOLOGIES CORP., Plaintiff, v. PALM INC., Defendant. Civ. No. 07-272-SLR. United States District Court, D. Delaware. September 14, 2010. *531 Jack B. Blumenfeld, Esquire and Rodger Dallery Smith, II, Esquire of Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Sean T. O'Kelly, Esquire of Cross & S

MEMORANDUM OPINION STARK, U.S. District Judge Pending before the Court in this patent infringement action are the following motions: 1. Defendants’ motion for leave to supplement the record to address recently developed facts regarding their motion for clarification of the Court’s construction of “within the telephone network.” (D.I. 498, C.A. No. 10-1067) (D.I. 68, C.A. No. 12-15

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SYMBIONT.IO, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2019-0407-JTL ) IPREO HOLDINGS, LLC, IPREO LTS LLC, ) IHS MARKIT LTD., and MARKIT NORTH ) AMERICA, INC., )

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SMASH FRANCHISE PARTNERS, LLC, ) and SMASH MY TRASH, LLC, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2020-0302-JTL ) KANDA HOLDINGS, INC., TODD PERRI, ) KEVIN MCLAREN, and DUMPSTER ) DEVIL, LLC, ) )

ANDREWS, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Presently before the Court are Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment of Infringement and Validity and Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony of Catharine M. Lawton (No. 16-453, D.I. 439; D.I. 16-454, D.I. 388; D.I. 16-455, D.I. 386)1 and related briefing (D.I. 448, 474, 503); Plaintiff's Motion to Correct Claim 19 of the '634 patent (D.I. 438) and related briefing (D.I. 438,

MEMORANDUM OPINION ROBINSON, District Judge I. INTRODUCTION On August 31, 2015, plaintiff Device Enhancement LLC (“plaintiff’) filed a complaint alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,747,683 (“the ’683 patent”) against defendant Amazon.com Inc. (“defendant”). (D.I. 1) Presently before the court is defendant’s motion to dismiss. (D.I. 11) The court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U

STARK, U.S. District Judge Presently before the Court is Defendants' Facebook Inc. ("Facebook") and Instagram LLC's ("Instagram" and collectively with Facebook, "Defendants") motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim (the "Motion"), filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (D.I. 8)1 Defendants argue that Plaintiff Search and Social Media Partners, LLC's ("SSMP" or "Plaintiff") ass

MEMORANDUM OPINION SUE L. ROBINSON, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff MobileMedia Ideas, LLC (“MobileMedia”) filed a patent infringement complaint against Apple Inc. (“Apple”) on March 31, 2010,. alleging infringement of fourteen of its patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 6,070,068 (“the '068 patent”), 6,253,075 (“the '075 patent”), RE39231 (“the '231 patent”), 5,737,394 (“the '394 paten

MEMORANDUM OPINION SUE L. ROBINSON, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION On January 14, 2011, plaintiff ButamaxTM Advanced Biofuels LLC (“Butamax”) filed suit in this district against defendant Gevo, Inc. (“Gevo”) alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,851,188 (“the '188 patent”). (D.I. 1) The '188 patent discloses and claims “a recombinant microorganism having an engineered isobutanol

708 F.Supp.2d 378 (2010) PASSLOGIX, INC., Plaintiff, v. 2FA TECHNOLOGY, LLC, 2FA, Inc., Gregory Salyards, and Shaun Cuttill, Defendants. No. 08 Civ. 10986(PKL). United States District Court, S.D. New York. April 27, 2010. *383 Proskauer Rose LLP, Steven M. Kayman, Esq., Dan Goldberger, Esq., Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP,

*947REVISED ORDER CONSTRUING AND DETERMINING VALIDITY OF CLAIMS OF UNITED STATES PATENT NO. 5,592,491 JON S. TIGAR, United States District Judge v On May 10, 2013, the Court held a hearing for the purpose of construing disputed terms in the claims of United States Patent No. 5,592,491. ECF No. 711. At that hearing, the Court requested further briefing

MEMORANDUM OPINION KEVIN R. HUENNEKENS, Bankruptcy Judge. The debtors, Circuit City Stores, Inc., et al, (the “Debtors,” or “Circuit City”) filed these bankruptcy cases under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code on November 10, 2008 (the “Petition Date”).1 The Debtors’ bankruptcy cases were consolidated for joint administration pursuant to Rule 1015(b) of the Fed

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE JIGGY PUZZLES, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff/Counterclaim ) Defendant, ) v. ) C.A. No. N24C-10-212 PRW ) CCLD STEELHEAD ACQUISITION EE, ) INC. AND AESTUARY, INC, )

MEMORANDUM OPINION ROBINSON, District Judge I. INTRODUCTION On October 6, 2011, plaintiff Intellectual Ventures I, LLC and Intellectual Ventures II, LLC (collectively “IV”) filed suit in this district against defendant Motorola Mobility, Inc. (“Motorola”) alleging infringement of six patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 7,810,144 (“the 144 patent”), 6,412,953 (“the ’953 patent”), 7,409,450 (“the ’450

MEMORANDUM OPINION HON. LEONARD P. STARK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Pending before the Court is Defendants AT & T Mobility LLC; AT & T Mobility II LLC; New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc.; SBC Internet Services; Wayport Inc.; T-Mobile USA, Inc.; T-Mobile US, Inc.; Nextel Operations, Inc.; Sprint Spectrum, L.P.; Boost Mobile, LLC; Virgin *584

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Case No. 20-cv-3010 (APM) ) GOOGLE LLC,