Cases

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA FILED HOPE HARRELL, May 1, 2023 Claimant Below, Petitioner EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS DANIEL SWOPE, FILED Claimant Below, Petitioner November 2, 2018 EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS vs.) No. 18

DECISION AND ORDER William C. Griesbach, Chief Judge, United States District Court The parties in this infringement 'action have filed cross motions for summary judgment. The Plaintiff seeks summary judgment as to both validity and infringement, while the Defendants’ motion limits itself to validity. This court previously addressed the patents in ah April 24, 2014 Decision and Order addressing claim constr

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 16-1453C Filed: November 17, 2017 Reissued: December 12, 20171 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ANALYTICAL GRAPHICS, INC., * * Bid Protest; Cross-Motions for Protestor, * Judgment on the Administrative v. * Re

629 F.3d 43 (2010) Karen FAIOLA, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. APCO GRAPHICS, INC., Defendant, Appellee. No. 10-1137. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. Heard November 3, 2010. Decided December 10, 2010. *45 Corinne Hood Greene for appellant. Matthew J. Griffin, with whom Philip M. Cronin and Peabod

MOORE, Judge, concurring in the rationale in part and concurring in the result. In this case, Paul Clemons sought permanent-total-disability benefits for a series of injuries he had suffered to his left knee and right shoulder. The record discloses that, after reaching maximum medical improvement from his last injury to his right shoulder on March 10, 2009, Clemons attempted to return to work at White Tiger

Quad Graphics, Inc. v. N.C. Dep’t of Revenue, 2021 NCBC 37. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION WAKE COUNTY 20 CVS 7449 QUAD GRAPHICS, INC., Petitioner, v. ORDER AND OPINION ON FIRST AMENDED PETITION FOR JUDICIAL NORTH CAROLINA D

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA QUAD/GRAPHICS, INC., FILED Employer Below, Petitioner April 10, 2023 EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK vs.) No. 22-ICA-253 (JCN: 2019016989) INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

Judge CALABRESI concurs in a separate opinion. DENNIS JACOBS, Chief Judge: Plaintiff-appellant Donna L. McGullam appeals pro se from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Hurley, J.), granting summary judgment on federal and state law claims of a sexually hostile work environment, disparate treatment, and retaliation in favor of McGullam’s employer,

OPINION KRAMER, CHIEF JUDGE: An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) for the Department of Workers’ Claims •entered an award of permanent partial disability benefits to Christopher Cunningham based in part upon an injury Cunningham sustained to his right shoulder while employed by Quad/Graphics, Inc. Cunningham appealed to the Workers’ Compensation Board (Board) because he believed his award (which was based up

607 F.3d 784 (2010) SILICON GRAPHICS, INC., Plaintiff-Cross Appellant, v. ATI TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ATI Technologies ULC, and Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 2008-1334, 2008-1353. United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. June 4, 2010. *786 James M. Bollinger, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, of New

741 F.Supp.2d 970 (2010) SILICON GRAPHICS, INC., Plaintiff, v. ATI TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ATI Technologies, ULC and Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., Defendants. No. 06-cv-611-bbc. United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin. October 5, 2010. *971 Daniel Allen Ladow, James M. Bollinger, Laura E. Krawczyk, Suraj Kumar Balusu, Troutman S

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RICHARD L. VOORHEES, District Judge. THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant Drafting and Design, Inc.’s Mo*534tion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 54); Defendants Lennar Corp. and Lennar Carolinas, LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 55); and Plaintiff Building Graphics, Inc.’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 57)

ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MAXINE M. CHESNEY, United States District Judge Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment, filed October 3, 2014, by plaintiff Synopsys Inc. (“Synopsys”) and defendant Mentor Graphics Corporation (“Mentor”), by which the parties set forth their respective positions as to the patent eligibility of eight claims as recited in three patents held by Synopsys,

569 F.Supp.2d 819 (2008) SILICON GRAPHICS, INC., Plaintiff, v. ATI TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ATI Technologies ULC, and Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., Defendants. No. 06-cv-611-bbc. United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin. August 1, 2008. *821 James M. Bollinger, David Nir, Jennifer L. Dereka, Joseph D. Etra, Philip Laurence Hirschh

EDWARD J. DAVILA, United States District Judge This putative worldwide class action is brought by one hundred and twenty-two Plaintiffs who hale from the fifty states and several U.S. territories as well as multiple foreign countries.1 Plaintiffs allege that, in an effort to fix battery life issues, Apple included code in updates to its mobile operating system (iOS) that significantly reduced the perform

CHEN, Circuit Judge. Synopsys, Inc. appeals the District Court for the Northern District of California’s grant of summary judgment invalidating certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,530,841; 5,680,318; and 5,748,488 (collectively, the Gregory Patents) under 35 U.S.C. § 101. See Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., 78 F.Supp.3d 958 (N.D. Cal. 2015)

Fremont-Smith, Thayer, J. On January 28,2004, the plaintiffs RIS Paper Company (“RIS”) and XPEDX (collectively, “plaintiffs”), commenced this action against the defendants Wave Graphics, Inc. (“Wave Graphics”) and Edward J. DeStefano, Jr. (“DeStefano”) alleging misappropriation of Wave Graphics’ proprietary customer information and fraudulent conveyance of same to DeStefano’s new employer, Unigraphics, Inc. Judgment was entered

NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, dissenting. The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011 changes the way patent validity disputes are resolved — a change at least as significant for this Nation’s patent system as the formation of the Federal Circuit in 1982. The purpose is as ambitious as it is necessary: to strengthen the incentive to industrial and technological innovation by restructuring the system for reviewing and

983 A.2d 531 (2009) 189 Md. App. 1 Glenn HAWKINS v. ROCKVILLE PRINTING & GRAPHICS, INC., et al. No. 2138, September Term, 2007. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. November 24, 2009. Bruce M. Bender (Andrew N. Sindler, Axelson, Williamowsky, on brief), Rockville, for Appellant. Andrew S. Cabana (Michael N. Petkovich, Jackson Lewi