Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION ROBINSON, District Judge INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Intellectual Ventures I, LLC (“IV I”) and Intellectual Ventures II, LLC (“IV II”) (collectively “IV”) brought this patent infringement action against defendant Motorola Mobility, Inc. (“Motorola”) on October 6, 2011, alleging infringement 0f sjx patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 7,810,144 (“the 144 patent”), 6,412,953 (“the ’953 patent”),

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS Nos. 14-CF-0667, 14-CF-0712, 14-CF-0724 & 14-CF-1089 LESTER WILLIAMS, II, ROBERT GIVENS, MARCELLUS E. JACKSON, and KEIR MAURICE JOHNSON, APPELLANTS,

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 17-1432 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. IDALIA MALDONADO-PEÑA, Defendant, Appellant. No. 17-1551 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. JUAN RIVERA-GEORGE, a/k/a TIO,

602 F.Supp.2d 1309 (2009) PEERLESS CLOTHING INTERNATIONAL, INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant. Slip Op. 09-4. Court No. 03-00537. United States Court of International Trade. January 13, 2009. *1312 Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A. (Arthur K. Purcell), New York, NY, for Plaintiff Peerless Clothing International, Inc

449 F.Supp.2d 1 (2006) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, and Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, and National African American Tobacco Prevention Network, Intervenors, v. PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC., (f/k/a Philip Morris, Inc.), et al., Defendants. No. CIV.A. 99-2496(GK). United States Distri

OPINION MILLER, Judge. This case is before the court after argument on plaintiffs motion for summary judgment. Three questions are presented concerning whether a transferee is protected from a claim by the Government for the return of six aircraft exchanged for other refurbished aircraft. The transferee challenges the Government’s right to assert a claim under the Contract Disputes Act of 1978,

Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District In Division TERRY D. MORRISON, ) ) Movant-Appellant, ) ) v. ) No. SD38438

HOOVER, P.J. ¶ 1. Rory McKellips appeals a judgment of conviction for use of a computer to facilitate a child sex crime contrary to Wis. Stat. § 948.075.1 McKellips argues the State failed to prove he communicated with the victim via a "computerized communication system." Alternatively, he argues Wis. Stat. § 948.075 is unconstitutionally vague regarding the meaning of computerized communication syste

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/ 07/11/2025 09:09 AM CDT - 435 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 319 Nebraska Reports STATE V. SAWYER Cite as 319 Neb. 435 State of N

CARAWAY, J. |¶ Following a bench trial, Robert Calvin Farris was convicted of two counts of second degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment at hard labor without benefits on each count, to be served consecutively. Farris now appeals. We affirm the defendant’s convictions and sentences. Facts On January 3, 2013, Madonna Wachter and Stephen Bryant were found dead in th

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas OPINION No. 04-17-00815-CR Issac WILLIAMS, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas,

REBECCA G. BRADLEY, J. ¶ 1. The State appeals the court of appeals published decision1 reversing Rory A. McKellips' conviction after a jury found McKellips guilty of using a computer to facilitate a child sex crime contrary to Wis. Stat. § 948.075(lr) (2013-14).2 The main issue in this case is whether the element, use of a "computerized communication system" in § 948.075(

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-17-00815-CR Issac WILLIAMS, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Ap

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WHALECO INC., Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 23-3706 (TJK) SHEIN TECHNOLOGY LLC et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION The parties in this case are online marketplaces that offer “ultra-fast fashion” products for sale. Temu, a newcomer to the marke

AFFIRMED; Opinion Filed July 24, 2014. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-12-01539-CR MORRIS WAYNE SIMONS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court

OPINION AND ORDER WILLIAM M. CONLEY, District Judge In this opinion and order, the court addresses a slew of post-trial motions. The jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (“WARF”) and awarded damages in the amount of $234 million. Invoking Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 50(b) and 59(3), defendant Apple, Inc., challenges virtually every aspect of the jury’s ve

Opinion DYK, Circuit Judge. DoorKing, Inc. (“DoorKing”) appeals from the decision of the United States District Court for the Central District of California granting the motion of Sentex Systems (“Sentex”) for summary judgment of non-infringement of U.S. Patent No. 4,604,501 (the “’501 patent”). DoorKing, Inc. v. Sentex Sys., Inc., No. CV-98-372 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 20, 2000 and May 12, 2000) (Doo

/07Z-/Y CCA NO. PD-1078-14 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPALS IN THE JAN 13 2015 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS AT, AUSTIN, TEXAS sta, Cleit MORRIS WAYNE SIMONS

*784 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JAMES F. HOLDERMAN, District Judge: The three above-captioned, nationwide class actions were filed against Capital One, its subsidiaries, and its Participating Vendors (collectively, “Defendants”),1 as a result of the Defendants’ allegedly using automatic telephone dialing syste

ILLINOIS OFFICIAL REPORTS Appellate Court Crittenden v. Cook County Comm’n on Human Rights, 2012 IL App (1st) 112437 Appellate Court JIMMY CRITTENDEN and JIMMY’S PLACE, Petitioners-Appellants, Caption v. COOK COUNTY COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS and LYNITA BOYD, Respondents-Appellees. District & No. First District, Sixth Division