Cases

972 P.2d 1060 (1998) John DOE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HIGH-TECH INSTITUTE, INC., d/b/a Cambridge College, an Arizona corporation, Defendant-Appellee. No. 97CA0385. Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. III. July 9, 1998. As Modified on Denial of Rehearing August 6, 1998. Certiorari Denied March 1, 1999.[*]

ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of-- ) ) High-Tech Launderette LLC ) ASBCA No. 62259 ) Under Contract No. IRW 17-089 ) APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: Mrs. Nanhui Merritt Owner APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT:

EDMONDSON, Circuit Judge: Two separate actions (with different plaintiffs) against the same defendants for alleged antitrust violations have been consolidated and are treated as one appeal. Plaintiffs appeal a jury verdict for defendants on antitrust claims. They also appeal the jury verdict against them on counterclaims for state and federal RICO violations. Many issues were raised on appeal. But we conclude that most of the

Palumbo v Citigroup Tech., Inc. (2025 NY Slip Op 04298) Palumbo v Citigroup Tech., Inc. 2025 NY Slip Op 04298 Decided on July 24, 2025 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER Lawrence E. Kahn, U.S. District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Scott McManus commenced this action against defendants Tetra Tech Construction, Inc. and Tetra Tech, Inc. (collectively, “Tetra Tech”) on July 19, 2016, alleging unlawful retaliation in viola*200tion of the employee-protection provisions of

MEMORANDUM PRATTER, District Judge. VWR International LLC (‘VWR”) moves to dismiss (Docket No. 29) Alpha Pro Tech, Inc.’s (“APT”) Second Amended Complaint (“SAC,” Docket No. 28). For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant the motion in part and deny it in part. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND1 As APT alleges in its

Leonie M. Brinkema, United States District Judge Before the Court is defendant CACI Premier Technology, Inc.'s ("CACI" or "defendant") Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. No. 626]. For the reasons that follow, the Motion will be granted in part and denied in part, and Counts 1, 4, and 7 of the Third Amended Complaint will be dismissed. Because portions of the Third Amended Complaint and the parties' briefs were filed under seal, this opinion h

VICTOR A. BOLDEN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY ... 169 II. FINDINGS OF FACT: THE PARTIES AND THE PRODUCTS ... 170 A. The Parties ... 170 B. Robert Haddock's Background in the Metal Roofing Industry ... 171 C. Robert Haddock's Inventions ... 172 D. The '629 Patent... 177

ACCEPTED 03-15-00423-CV 7966631 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUST

[Pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 5:18-cv-01477-LHK] Michael H. Simon, United States District Judge *1199In this matter, the Court is called upon to balance the legitimate discovery needs of a defendant in a civil lawsuit pending in another district with the legitimate privacy needs of a nonparty wi

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 24a0012p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ SCOTT E. GAMMONS, │ Plaintiff-Appellant,

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER LORETTA C. BIGGS, District Judge. Plaintiff initiated this action on January 11, 2016 against her former employer, R & R Transportation, Inc. (“R & R” or “Defendant”), alleging sex discrimination, sexual harassment, retaliation and wrongful termination in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 et seq. (“Title VII”), as well as breach of contract.

[Cite as TS Tech USA Corp. v. Pataskala, 2024-Ohio-5534.] COURT OF APPEALS LICKING COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT TS TECH USA CORPORATION : JUDGES: : : Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, P.J. Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appell

OPINION PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 52(a)(1) IRENAS, Senior District Judge. This case involves claims by Vibra-Tech Engineers, Inc. (“Vibra-Tech”) that Defendants Scott and Roberta Kavalek (collectively “the Kavalek Defendants”) breached employment agreements, violated the duty of loyalty, converted VibraTech’s property, and engaged in a civil conspiracy in order to benefit their own competing corporation

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 22-2664 ___________________________ Scott Burnett; Ryan Hendrickson; Jerod Breit; Scott Trupiano; Jeremy Keel; Frances Harvey; Hollee Ellis lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiffs - Appellees Shelly Dreyer llllll

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE VETON VEJSELI, BRETT PERRY, and ) CHRISTOPHER VILLINGER, on ) behalf of themselves and all similarly ) situated stockholders of Ionic Digital, ) Inc., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2025-0232-BWD

Case: 21-11087 Document: 00516358014 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/15/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED

Leonie M. Brinkema, United States District Judge Before the Court is defendant CACI Premier Technology, Inc.'s ("CACI" or "defendant") Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. No. 626]. For the reasons that follow, the Motion will be granted in part and denied in part, and Counts 1, 4, and 7 of the Third Amended Complaint will be dismissed. Because portions of the Third Amended Complaint and the parties' briefs were filed under seal, this opinion ha

642 F.3d 633 (2011) Richard RAHLF, Frank Stelter, & Scott Johnson, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MO-TECH CORP., INC., Defendant-Appellee. No. 10-1113. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: November 16, 2010. Filed: June 16, 2011. *635 James H. Kaster, argued, Sarah W. Steenhoek, on the brief, M

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 20‐2235 SCOTT WEAVER, Plaintiff‐Appellant, v. CHAMPION PETFOODS USA INC. and CHAMPION PETFOODS LP, Defendants‐Appellees. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court