Cases

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ No. 21-3234 ______________ JASWINDER SINGH, on behalf of himself and all those similarly situated, Appellant v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. ______________ No. 21-3

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ No. 21-3234 ______________ JASWINDER SINGH, on behalf of himself and all those similarly situated, Appellant v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. ______________ No. 21-3

NEWMAN, Circuit Judge. This appeal is from the Order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, denying the Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration of their pending litigation with Waymo LLC. 1 The Defendants are Uber Technologies, Inc., Ottomotto LLC, and O

CORRECTED In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 21-856 Filed: April 14, 2021 Reissued: April 19, 2021 * DARTON INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, and MILSUP LLC, Defendant-Intervenor. Michelle F. Ka

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 21-856 Filed: April 14, 2021 Reissued: April 19, 2021 * DARTON INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, and MILSUP LLC, Defendant-Intervenor. Michelle F. Kantor, McDonald Hopkins LLC, Chicago, IL, and Mary F.

Pre-Award Bid Protest; Motion to Dismiss; Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction; Standing; Waiver. OPINION HORN, Judge In this court, protestors, Palantir Technologies Inc. (Palantir Technologies) and Palan-tir USG, Inc., (Palantir USG) filed a pre-award bid protest on June'27, 2016, challenging the Department of the Army, Army Contrac

WOOD, Chief Judge. This lawsuit involves a complicated transaction — or set of transactions— among several related companies, most of which are based in the Republic of Korea. At its core, the lawsuit alleges that the defendants, Korean company Philos & D, Inc. (P & D), and Korean citizens Don-Hee and Jae-Hee Park, unlawfully retained equipment that p

Frank J. Bailey, United States Bankruptcy Judge I. INTRODUCTION By its 16-count complaint in this adversary proceeding, plaintiff and reorganized chapter 11 debtor BT Prime Ltd. ("BT Prime," "the Debtor," or "the plaintiff"), formerly a currency trading business, seeks against the four defendants, each an affiliate of BT Prime, to avoid and recover fraudulent and preferential transfers, recover dam

OPINION LASTER, Vice Chancellor. Bloodhound Technologies, Inc. (“Bloodhound” or the “Company”) created web-*628based software applications that allowed healthcare providers to monitor claims for fraud. The plaintiffs are five software developers, including Bloodhound’s founder, who contend that their years of hard work laid the foundatio

USCA11 Case: 23-12539 Document: 70-1 Date Filed: 01/06/2026 Page: 1 of 76 FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-12539 ____________________ FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

*166 AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER SARIS, District Judge. Introduction The patents in-suit concern technology used to scan and create highly accurate digital models of three-dimensional physical objects. Metris U.S.A., INC., Metris N.V., Metris IPR N.V., and 3D Scanners Ltd.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AS TO COUNT TWO OF PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT Gregory F. Kishel, Chief United States Bankruptcy Judge This adversary proceeding came before the undersigned bankruptcy judge on cross-motions for summary judgment on Count Two of the Plaintiffs amended complaint. The Plaintiff (“the Trustee”) appeared personally and by his attorneys, Ralph V. Mitchell

*593OPINION OF THE COURT Kenneth R. Fisher, J. Defendant, Intek Integration Technologies, Inc., moves to dismiss plaintiffs complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) on the ground that the parties’ software license agreement contained a forum selection clause requiring that the action be brought in the State of Washington. Intek also moves to dismiss be

429 B.R. 692 (2010) In re VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM, a California Local Health Care District, Debtor. Prime Healthcare Management, Inc., a California corporation, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Valley Health System, a California Local Health Care District, et al., Defendants. Bankruptcy No. 6:07-bk-18293-PC. Adversary No. 6:09-ap-01708-PC. United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California, Riverside Division.

166 B.R. 993 (1994) In re PRIME MOTOR INNS, INC., et al., Debtors. Bankruptcy No. 90-16604-BKC-AJC. United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida, Miami Division. April 22, 1994. *994 Stephen D. Busey, E. Lanny Russell, Smith Hulsey & Busey, Jacksonville, FL, for Prime Motor Inns, Inc., et al. Eugene Van Voorhis, Van Voorhis &a;

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 21-775C (Filed Under Seal: August 2, 2021) (Reissued: August 16, 2021) ) OAK GROVE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, )

ORDER SAM SPARKS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE BE IT REMEMBERED on the 28th day of March 2016, the Court held a hearing in the above-styled cause, and the parties appeared by and through counsel. Before the Court is Defendant Plano Encryption Technologies, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Original Complaint [#10]; Plaintiff Broadway' National Bank d/b/a'Broadway Bank’s ■ Response [#13] thereto; Defendan

42 P.3d 1221 (2001) 131 N.M. 772 2002-NMCA-030 SANTA FE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ARGUS NETWORKS, INC., and David L. Jannetta, et al., Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 21,381, 21,382, 21,469, 21,470. Court of Appeals of New Mexico. December 13, 2001. Certiorari denied February 28, 2002 and March 6, 200

234 B.R. 699 (1999) In re TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS, INC., Debtor. In re Advanced Technologies International, Inc., Debtor. In re Meridian Transport Co., Debtor. Technologies International Holdings Inc., et al., Plaintiffs, v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al., Defendants. Bankruptcy Nos. 99-50867, 99-50868, 99-50869, Adversary No. 99-5074. United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Kent

STRINE, Vice Chancellor. Metro Communication Corp., BVI (“Metro”) is a former member of Fidelity Ventures Brazil, LLC (“Fidelity Brazil”), which was established by a limited liability company agreement in February 1998 (the “LLC Agreement”) as the vehicle through which Metro and the other members of Fidelity Brazil would invest venture capital in the then-recently deregulated South American telecommunications market. By Octo