Settlement Traps for the Unwary

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Settlement Traps for the Unwary"

Transcription

1 Settlement Traps for the Unwary Orange County Bar Association Intellectual Property/Technology Law August 21, 2006 Steve Comer Jae Hong Lee, MD, MPH 2005 Morrison & Foerster LLP All Rights Reserved

2 3 Cases 3 Lessons Have you settled? Exigent Tech., Inc. v. Atrana Solutions, Inc., 442 F.3d 1301 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 22, 2006) What future claims are barred after a settlement? Pactiv Corp. v. Dow Chemical, 449 F.3d 1227 (Fed. Cir. June 5, 2006) May a settling manufacturer later seek to protect customers threatened with suit? Microchip Technology v. The Chamberlain Group, 441 F.3d 936 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 15, 2006) 2

3 Exigent Tech., Inc. v. Atrana Solutions, Inc. Have you settled? U.S. Patent No. 6,651,885 A multi-function transaction processing system. 3

4 Exigent Tech.: Background March 2, 2004: Exigent files suit against Atrana alleging infringement of the 885 patent. September 24, 2004: Atrana files a motion for summary judgment on the issues of infringement, invalidity, and unenforceability. District Court granted Exigent two extensions of time. October 26, 2004: Exigent, with new counsel, filed a Rule 56(f) motion for another extension of time. Exigent did not file a substantive response to Atrana s summary judgment motion. November 3, 2004: District Court denies Exigent s Rule 56(f) motion. 4

5 Exigent Tech.: Agreement in Principle Term Sheet November 10, 2004: Exigent and Atrana attended a mandated mediation session, where they signed an Agreement in Principle Term Sheet. Exigent agreed to license the patented system to Atrana in exchange for royalty payments. Agreed to dismiss the case under terms to be determined. Exigent and Atrana agreed that this Agreement will not affect any deadlines set by the Court. The Term Sheet contemplated that the parties would proceed to negotiate and sign a formal agreement. 5

6 Exigent Tech.: Agreement in Principle Term Sheet The Agreement in Principle Term Sheet stated: The parties agree to negotiate additional terms ordinarily in licensing agreements of this sort in good faith to within five business days execute a formal Settlement Agreement embodying these Principles and forward it to the Mediator for filing with the Court, failing which the mediator will report an impasse. 6

7 Exigent Tech.: The Plot Twist Also on November 10, 2004: On the same day the Agreement in Principle Term Sheet was signed, the District Court granted Atrana s motion for summary judgment with respect to noninfringement, declining to address the issues of invalidity and unenforceability. District Court denied all pending motions as moot. November 18, 2004: Exigent files a motion asking the District Court to vacate its summary judgment decision and to enforce the alleged settlement agreement as reflected in the Term Sheet. November 22, 2004: Mediator reports an impasse with respect to a final settlement agreement per a telephone call from Defendant s counsel. 7

8 Exigent Tech.: District Court s Final Order March 10, 2005: District Court entered a final order of dismissal. March 15, 2005: Exigent filed a motion for clarification of the final order, arguing that the District Court could not issue a final order because the Court had not decided its motion to vacate summary judgment and enforce the alleged settlement agreement. Exigent appealed to the Federal Circuit. 8

9 Exigent Tech.: The Federal Circuit s Decision Federal Circuit affirmed the grant of summary judgment of noninfringement. Federal Circuit reversed the order denying as moot Exigent s motion to enforce the settlement agreement, stating that if the agreement was enforceable, it rendered moot the entry of final judgment. Federal Circuit suggested that if the essential terms had been agreed upon by the parties, the Term Sheet was an enforceable agreement. Remanded to the District Court for further proceedings. 9

10 Exigent Tech.: Lessons This can happen to you. Keep the court informed: --Notify the court of any ongoing settlement or mediation discussions. --Notify the court immediately once any agreement is reached. --Some courts will have the parties put an agreement on the record. Basic contract law: --Make clear, in the text, when precisely an agreement becomes enforceable (a contract). --Consider including in the Term Sheet that the agreement is not enforceable until a formal settlement is executed. --Contingency clause: settlement value decreases for loser and increases for winner of a summary judgment motion. 10

11 Pactiv Corp. v. Dow Chem. Co. What Future Claims Are Barred After A Settlement? U.S. Patent No. 5,424,016 A method for providing accelerated release of a blowing agent from an extruded plastic foam. 11

12 Pactiv v. Dow: Background In 1995, Dow sued Pactiv for infringement of two patents, and Pactiv counterclaimed for invalidity and unenforceability. Parties reached a number of Settlement and License agreements (collectively, the 1998 Agreement ) that included a dismissal of the claims and counterclaims with prejudice. Under the 1998 Agreement, Pactiv agreed to pay royalties to Dow on the two patents. In late 2002, Pactiv stopped paying royalties, claiming the patents were invalid. December 30, 2003: Pactiv filed for declaratory judgment alleging noninfringement, invalidity, and unenforceability. 12

13 Pactiv v. Dow: District Court Dow moved for dismissal under FRCP 12(b)(6), arguing that Pactiv s suit was barred by res judicata (claim preclusion). The parties agreed that Pactiv s suit was barred unless: 1. the 1998 Agreement reserved Pactiv s right to challenge the patents in the future; or 2. Pactiv had been denied a full and fair opportunity to litigate the invalidity and unenforceability claims. District Court granted Dow s 12(b)(6) motion and dismissed Pactiv s suit, concluding that res judicata applied and that the plain language of the 1998 Agreement did not expressly reserve future litigation rights. 13

14 Pactiv v. Dow: Federal Circuit Analysis/Holding Federal Circuit affirmed (Michel, Bryson, Dyk). General rule: claim preclusion bars the relitigation of a claim that was, or could have been raised, in a prior action between the parties that was adjudicated on the merits. Dismissal with prejudice is an adjudication on the merits for claim preclusion purposes. Exception: parties can expressly reserve the right to relitigate a claim as part of an agreement, and therefore avoid claim preclusion. However, Federal Circuit holds that did not happen here. 14

15 Pactiv v. Dow: Federal Circuit Analysis/Holding Federal Circuit states that Pactiv had the legal standard backwards: The question is not whether the 1998 Agreement precluded Pactiv from future litigation; the question is whether the 1998 Agreement expressly permitted Pactiv to participate in future litigation. (emphasis added) 15

16 Pactiv v. Dow: The 1998 Agreement No express reservation of rights to relitigate invalidity and unenforceability claims: [Pactiv s] obligation to pay royalty... will terminate if: (1) the particular Dow Patent or claim is found invalid through any final judicial or administrative proceeding... [or] (3) the Dow Patent or claim is found to be unenforceable through any final judicial or administrative proceeding. 16

17 Pactiv v. Dow: The 1998 Agreement Express release of Dow from all claims relating to the patents: [Pactiv]... does hereby release each and every Dow Released Party from... any and all claims... relating to those Dow Patents... 17

18 Pactiv v. Dow: Lessons There is no default reservation of rights with respect to future claims that might be barred by res judicata. Must expressly reserve any right to litigate a claim within the four corners of the agreement. Dismiss your counterclaims without prejudice? Don t have mutual releases? Pay attention to basic principles in contract drafting. 18

19 Microchip Technology v. The Chamberlain Group May a settling manufacturer later seek to protect its customers threatened with suit? U.S. Patent No. 4,750,118 A garage door operator for a garage door... 19

20 Microchip v. Chamberlain: First Case Microchip makes chips and software for garage-door openers that learn the opening code. Chamberlain makes openers. In an earlier case, Microchip sued Chamberlain for infringement. The parties settled. Chamberlain received a license to the Microchip patents and granted a covenant not to sue Microchip for infringement of Chamberlain s patents: Under no circumstance shall the foregoing release be construed as a release of Microchip, its present Affiliates or any customers thereof with respect to claims relating to [Chamberlain's patents]. The foregoing sentence notwithstanding, [Chamberlain] hereby agrees that it will not bring suit against Microchip or Microchip's current Affiliates involving any of the CGI Patents. 20

21 Microchip v. Chamberlain: Second Case In the years following the settlement agreement, Chamberlain sued one of Microchip s customers for infringement, and threatened others. Microchip filed an action for declaratory relief of invalidity, unenforceability, noninfringement, and patent exhaustion. Microchip argued that the settlement agreement was a license, and that under doctrine of patent exhaustion Chamberlain could not sue the customers. 21

22 Microchip v. Chamberlain: District Court Chamberlain moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The District Court held that there was jurisdiction under the Declaratory Judgment Act. The District Court reasoned that although Microchip was not threatened with suit, Chamberlain s suits against Microchip s customers had the practical effect that Microchip could not sell its chips without subjecting its customers to risk of suit. The District Court concluded that Microchip had a reasonable apprehension that its customers would be sued for infringement. Microchip s motions for summary judgment of invalidity granted. 22

23 Microchip v. Chamberlain: Federal Circuit Federal Circuit reversed (Lourie, Rader, Linn). Two-part test to determine whether there is an actual case or controversy: Reasonable apprehension of infringement suit if it continues activity, and Present activity that could constitute infringement (or concrete steps toward such activity) Microchip had no apprehension of suit, because of the covenant not to sue. Microchip s economic interest in clarifying the rights of its customers does not create an apprehension of suit. No cause of action could be brought against Microchip. 23

24 Microchip v. Chamberlain: Federal Circuit Indemnity agreement suffices? Nor has Microchip established a legal relationship between it and a customer that had a legal interest adverse to Chamberlain, such as the existence of an indemnity agreement between Microchip and its customer. 24

25 Microchip v. Chamberlain: Federal Circuit Liability for inducing infringement suffices? Arrowhead Industrial Water v. Ecolochem, 846 F.2d 731 (Fed. Cir. 1988). Arrowhead provided customers with all the steps of allegedly infringing water-treatment process. Arrowhead was potentially inducing infringement and had indemnified its customers. Thus, patentee could have brought infringement suit against Arrowhead. No indication that Microchip would be liable for inducing or contributing to infringement (it had a covenant not to sue). 25

26 Microchip v. Chamberlain: Lessons State in settlement agreement that customers are released. Example: Immunity. The rights and license granted to Licensee... shall inure to the benefit of, and includes an immunity from suit against, any direct or indirect distributor, reseller, customer or other user of Licensed Products manufactured or sold by or for Licensee, any Affiliate and/or any sublicensee

27 Microchip v. Chamberlain: Lessons Consider whether to limit the scope of a covenant not to sue so that it does not preclude a suit as to customers. Note: everything else being equal, the alleged infringer would normally want as broad a covenant as possible. But here, the broad covenant blocked Microchip from protecting its customers. 27

28 3 Lessons -- Summary Exigent: Keep the court informed of any settlement discussions and express clearly within the text of the agreement precisely when the agreement becomes enforceable. Pactiv: Dismissal of counterclaims with prejudice bars future challenges to invalidity. Any right you want preserved after a settlement agreement should be expressly reserved within the four corners of the agreement. Microchip: Consider all parties you want to protect through a settlement agreement, especially your customers, and expressly protect them in the agreement. 28

29 Resources for Patent Settlement Agreements Involve a licensing lawyer early Exemplars Treatises and form books on licensing 29

Case 1:14-cv-05919-JEI-KMW Document 43 Filed 05/20/15 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 254

Case 1:14-cv-05919-JEI-KMW Document 43 Filed 05/20/15 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 254 Case 1:14-cv-05919-JEI-KMW Document 43 Filed 05/20/15 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 254 LAWRENCE C. HERSH Attorney at Law 17 Sylvan Street, Suite 102B Rutherford, New Jersey 07070 (201) 507-6300 AUSTIN HANSLEY Austin

More information

STATE OF ILLINOIS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

STATE OF ILLINOIS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION This Recommended Order and Decision became the Order and Decision of the Illinois Human Rights Commission on 4/30/02. STATE OF ILLINOIS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF: ) ) I. M. HOFMANN, ) )

More information

Art Project Purchase Agreement

Art Project Purchase Agreement Art Project Purchase Agreement THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this by and between, ( Buyer ), resident of, and, ( Seller ), a resident of. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Seller is an artist and has developed

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN JOSEPH WHITE, Plaintiff, Case No. 00-C-13 88 v. Hon. J. P. Stadtmueller HEARTLAND HIGH-YIELD MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, et al. Defendants. AMENDED ORDER

More information

Case: 09-1166 Document: 00319804259 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/09/2009 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No.

Case: 09-1166 Document: 00319804259 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/09/2009 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. Case: 09-1166 Document: 00319804259 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/09/2009 PER CURIAM. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 09-1166 LOU MARRA HOGG S, Appellant v. NOT PRECEDENTIAL STATE OF

More information

Legal FAQ: Introduction to Patent Litigation

Legal FAQ: Introduction to Patent Litigation Legal FAQ: Introduction to Patent Litigation by charlene m. morrow and dargaye churnet 1. Who enforces a patent? The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office grants a patent. Contrary to popular belief, a patent

More information

DEVELOPMENTS IN THE TRANSFER OF PATENT RIGHTS

DEVELOPMENTS IN THE TRANSFER OF PATENT RIGHTS PROTECTING PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS THE U.S. MODEL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE TRANSFER OF PATENT RIGHTS Paolo M. Trevisan Patent Attorney Office of Policy and External Affairs United States Patent and Trademark

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION ORLANDO COMMUNICATIONS LLC, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION Plaintiff, v. Case No: 6:14-cv-1022-Orl-22KRS SPRINT SPECTRUM, L.P. and SPRINT CORPORATION, Defendants.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 13-14772 Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 6:13-cv-01304-GKS-DAB.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 13-14772 Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 6:13-cv-01304-GKS-DAB. Case: 13-14772 Date Filed: 10/14/2014 Page: 1 of 7 [DO NOT PUBLISH] KRISHNA REDDY, IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 13-14772 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 6:13-cv-01304-GKS-DAB

More information

ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE Case 3:07-cv-01886-JAG-SCC Document 473 Filed 06/10/13 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO SAMUEL HILDENBRAND, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: ROBERT M. EDWARDS, JR. Jones Obenchain, LLP South Bend, Indiana ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: KATHRYN A. MOLL Nation Schoening Moll Fortville, Indiana IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

More information

Federal Circuit Clears the Way for Large False Patent Marking Fines. by Corina Tanasa January 27, 2010

Federal Circuit Clears the Way for Large False Patent Marking Fines. by Corina Tanasa January 27, 2010 Federal Circuit Clears the Way for Large False Patent Marking Fines by Corina Tanasa January 27, 2010 PATENT MARKING By statute, each patented product must be marked to collect maximum patent damages.

More information

SHANA J. SHUTLER OPINION BY v. Record No. 051852 JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR. June 8, 2006 AUGUSTA HEALTH CARE FOR WOMEN, P.L.C.

SHANA J. SHUTLER OPINION BY v. Record No. 051852 JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR. June 8, 2006 AUGUSTA HEALTH CARE FOR WOMEN, P.L.C. Present: All the Justices SHANA J. SHUTLER OPINION BY v. Record No. 051852 JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, JR. June 8, 2006 AUGUSTA HEALTH CARE FOR WOMEN, P.L.C. FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF AUGUSTA COUNTY Humes

More information

~INAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

~INAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE Case 1:12-cv-06677-JSR Document 110 Filed 06/29/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK EDWARD ZYBURO, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, NCSPLUS

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA M E M O R A N D U M. STENGEL, J. November, 2005

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA M E M O R A N D U M. STENGEL, J. November, 2005 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE : COMPANY of AMERICA, : CIVIL ACTION Plaintiff : : v. : NO. 04-462 : PAUL M. PRUSKY, : STEVEN G. PRUSKY,

More information

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO In Re: ) ) CHIEF JUDGE RICHARD L. SPEER Paul I. Hickman ) ) Debtor(s) ) ) (Related Case: 00-31579) Paul Hickman ) ) Plaintiff(s) ) ) v.

More information

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL TRIAL DIVISION

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL TRIAL DIVISION IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL TRIAL DIVISION JOHN FRAZIER HUNT, : DECEMBER TERM, 2004 Plaintiff, : No. 2742 v. : (Commerce Program) NATIONAL

More information

Case: 1:10-cv-00363-WHB Doc #: 31 Filed: 09/02/10 1 of 14. PageID #: 172

Case: 1:10-cv-00363-WHB Doc #: 31 Filed: 09/02/10 1 of 14. PageID #: 172 Case: 1:10-cv-00363-WHB Doc #: 31 Filed: 09/02/10 1 of 14. PageID #: 172 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION JAMES MEYER, v. Plaintiff, DEBT RECOVERY SOLUTIONS

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMMSCOPE, INC. OF NORTH CAROLINA and ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC., v. Plaintiffs, CORNING OPTICAL COMMUNICATIONS WIRELESS LTD., Defendant.

More information

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-1473 ROCKY MOUNTAIN TECHNOLOGY ENGINEERING COMPANY, LLC, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, HUTCHENS INDUSTRIES,

More information

FEE SHIFTING IN PATENT LITIGATION

FEE SHIFTING IN PATENT LITIGATION FEE SHIFTING IN PATENT LITIGATION Sughrue Mion, PLLC Abraham J. Rosner May 2014 I. BACKGROUND In the U.S., each party to litigation ordinarily pays its own attorney fees regardless of the outcome (called

More information

Case 3:06-cv-00701-MJR-DGW Document 526 Filed 07/20/15 Page 1 of 8 Page ID #13631 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case 3:06-cv-00701-MJR-DGW Document 526 Filed 07/20/15 Page 1 of 8 Page ID #13631 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS Case 3:06-cv-00701-MJR-DGW Document 526 Filed 07/20/15 Page 1 of 8 Page ID #13631 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS ANTHONY ABBOTT, et al., ) ) No: 06-701-MJR-DGW Plaintiffs,

More information

Defensive Strategies in False Marking Suits After Stauffer and Pequignot

Defensive Strategies in False Marking Suits After Stauffer and Pequignot Defensive Strategies in False Marking Suits After Stauffer and Pequignot Contributed by Angie M. Hankins, Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP Many companies inadvertently mark their products with expired patents.

More information

Case 1:13-cv-06016-VEC Document 71-1 Filed 09/05/14 Page 76 of 87. x : : : : : : : x [PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Case 1:13-cv-06016-VEC Document 71-1 Filed 09/05/14 Page 76 of 87. x : : : : : : : x [PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE Case 113-cv-06016-VEC Document 71-1 Filed 09/05/14 Page 76 of 87 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re LIGHTINTHEBOX HOLDING CO., LTD., SECURITIES LITIGATION x x Case

More information

T.C. Memo. 2012-264 UNITED STATES TAX COURT. PAUL A. BILZERIAN AND TERRI L. STEFFEN, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent

T.C. Memo. 2012-264 UNITED STATES TAX COURT. PAUL A. BILZERIAN AND TERRI L. STEFFEN, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent T.C. Memo. 2012-264 UNITED STATES TAX COURT PAUL A. BILZERIAN AND TERRI L. STEFFEN, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 3648-98. Filed September 12, 2012. Paul A. Bilzerian

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case 2:03-cv-01500-KOB -TMP Document 1718 Filed 07/26/10 Page 1 of 9 FILED 2010 Jul-26 PM 02:01 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

More information

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE : AL JAZEERA AMERICA, LLC, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : C.A. No. 8823-VCG : AT&T SERVICES, INC., : : Defendant. : : MOTION TO STAY OCTOBER 14, 2013 LETTER OPINION

More information

F I L E D November 16, 2012

F I L E D November 16, 2012 Case: 11-60503 Document: 00512055877 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/16/2012 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D November 16, 2012

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. Schiller, J. May, 2001

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. Schiller, J. May, 2001 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA DIVERSIFIED HEALTH ASSOCIATES, INC., et al., CIVIL ACTION Plaintiffs, v. BOROUGH OF NORRISTOWN, et al., No. 00-5702 Defendants.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE REMY INC., UNIT PARTS COMPANY, and WORLDWIDE AUTOMOTIVE, LLC, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Plaintiffs, v. C. A. No. 06-785-GMS/MPT CIF LICENSING, LLC D/B/A GE LICENSING,

More information

THE JOHN MARSHALL LAW SCHOOL CENTER FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW. 53 rd ANNIVERSARY CONFERENCE ON DEVELOPMENTS IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW

THE JOHN MARSHALL LAW SCHOOL CENTER FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW. 53 rd ANNIVERSARY CONFERENCE ON DEVELOPMENTS IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW THE JOHN MARSHALL LAW SCHOOL CENTER FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW 53 rd ANNIVERSARY CONFERENCE ON DEVELOPMENTS IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW Strategies Regarding Patent Exhaustion After Quanta Timothy C.

More information

The Enforceability of Mediated Settlement Agreements. By: Thomas J. Smith The Law Offices of Thomas J. Smith San Antonio, Texas

The Enforceability of Mediated Settlement Agreements. By: Thomas J. Smith The Law Offices of Thomas J. Smith San Antonio, Texas The Enforceability of Mediated Settlement Agreements By: Thomas J. Smith The Law Offices of Thomas J. Smith San Antonio, Texas NIGHTMARE ON MEDIATION STREET You mediate a case where the Plaintiff is suing

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: * BONNIE LEE WHETSTINE, * Chapter 7 Debtor * * Case No.: 1-05-bk-10057MDF BONNIE LEE WHETSTINE, * Movant * * v. * MOTION

More information

Case 2:09-cv-07349-AJM-KWR Document 19 Filed 02/10/10 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

Case 2:09-cv-07349-AJM-KWR Document 19 Filed 02/10/10 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA Case 2:09-cv-07349-AJM-KWR Document 19 Filed 02/10/10 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA FIRST FINANCIAL INSURANCE COMPANY * CIVIL ACTION VERSUS * NO: 09-7349 JOSE ARRIAGA

More information

CALIFORNIA Strict Indemnity Language. CALIFORNIA Intermediate Indemnity Language

CALIFORNIA Strict Indemnity Language. CALIFORNIA Intermediate Indemnity Language CALIFORNIA Strict Indemnity Language Contractor (Indemnitor) shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Authority, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers from and against any and all liability,

More information

PLAINTIFF S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIM

PLAINTIFF S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIM DOCKET NO. PJR CV-02-0817228 SUPERIOR COURT DAVID A. WILSON JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD V. AT HARTFORD THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY AND THE TRAVELERS LIFE AND ANNUITY COMPANY NOVEMBER 20,2002 PLAINTIFF

More information

Case 1:12-cv-01203-VEC Document 206 Filed 10/15/15 Page 1 of 10 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #:

Case 1:12-cv-01203-VEC Document 206 Filed 10/15/15 Page 1 of 10 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: Case 1:12-cv-01203-VEC Document 206 Filed 10/15/15 Page 1 of 10 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: DATE FILED: 10/15/2015 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CITY OF

More information

2014 IL App (3d) 120079-U. Order filed January 13, 2014 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2014 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

2014 IL App (3d) 120079-U. Order filed January 13, 2014 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2014 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e(1. 2014 IL App (3d 120079-U Order filed

More information

MONTANA EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, CASCADE COUNTY. Appearing on behalf of the Named Plaintiff and the Class were attorneys Daniel P.

MONTANA EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, CASCADE COUNTY. Appearing on behalf of the Named Plaintiff and the Class were attorneys Daniel P. ,5SEPV Wl0: 3ii /"'LCD JCOURT MONTANA EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, CASCADE COUNTY Robert Jacobsen, -vs- Allstate Insurance Company, Plaintiff, Defendant. Cause No.: ADV-03-201(d) Final Order Approving

More information

REVISITING DIRECTOR AND OFFICER INDEMNIFICATION: PROVISIONS IN THE NEW D.C. NONPROFIT ACT

REVISITING DIRECTOR AND OFFICER INDEMNIFICATION: PROVISIONS IN THE NEW D.C. NONPROFIT ACT Updated July 2015 REVISITING DIRECTOR AND OFFICER INDEMNIFICATION: PROVISIONS IN THE NEW D.C. NONPROFIT ACT 1. Initial Considerations The District of Columbia has recently modernized its statute dealing

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 10-10823 Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 6:07-cv-01974-GAP-GJK.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No. 10-10823 Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 6:07-cv-01974-GAP-GJK. Case: 10-10823 Date Filed: 10/13/2010 Page: 1 of 7 [PUBLISH] CARLOS SHURICK, IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 10-10823 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 6:07-cv-01974-GAP-GJK

More information

WHEREAS, Participants desire to participate in ALL the recreational activities available at the Trampoline Park; and

WHEREAS, Participants desire to participate in ALL the recreational activities available at the Trampoline Park; and THIS PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT is made and effective as of the last date executed (hereinafter the "Effective Date") by and between Get Air Savannah (hereinafter "Get Air") and the adult or guardian identified

More information

The Fate of Anti-Assignment Clauses After Bankruptcy

The Fate of Anti-Assignment Clauses After Bankruptcy Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com The Fate of Anti-Assignment Clauses After Bankruptcy

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: CRAIG D. DOYLE KURT V. LAKER Doyle Legal Corporation, P.C. Indianapolis, Indiana ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: ANNE L. COWGUR WHITNEY L. MOSBY Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP

More information

Alert. Litigation May 2014

Alert. Litigation May 2014 Alert Litigation May 2014 Statute of Limitations Update in Florida Foreclosure Actions: Fifth District Court of Appeals Holds that Each Default Creates a New Case of Action I. The Opinion On April 25,

More information

Case 5:06-cv-00503-XR Document 20 Filed 09/28/06 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

Case 5:06-cv-00503-XR Document 20 Filed 09/28/06 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION Case 5:06-cv-00503-XR Document 20 Filed 09/28/06 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, VS. Plaintiff, HENRY D. GOLTZ, EVANGELINA

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Thompson v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company et al Doc. 1 1 1 WO William U. Thompson, v. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Plaintiff, Property & Casualty Insurance

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO COLORADO CRIMINAL DEFENSE BAR, a Colorado non-profit corporation; COLORADO CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM COALITION, a Colorado

More information

Securities Litigation

Securities Litigation Securities Litigation Alert July 2009 Eleventh Circuit Affirms Bar Order, in Connection with Partial Settlement of Class Action, Extinguishing Non-Settling Former CEO Defendant s Contractual Rights to

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE MEMORANDUM ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE MEMORANDUM ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ' PENINSULA ADVISORS, LLC and AlP RESORT DEVELOPMENT, LLC, Plaintiffs, v. C. A. No. 0-489-LPS FAIRSTAR RESOURCES LTD., Defendant. i J MEMORANDUM

More information

The Appellate Mandate: What It Is and Why It Matters By Jennifer L. Swize

The Appellate Mandate: What It Is and Why It Matters By Jennifer L. Swize ARTICLES The Appellate Mandate: What It Is and Why It Matters By Jennifer L. Swize Just the other day, a trial team handling post-appeal matters on remand wanted to know the significance of the mandate

More information

causes of actions based on Travelers own tortious conduct and not directly related to the Manville insurance policies.[12]

causes of actions based on Travelers own tortious conduct and not directly related to the Manville insurance policies.[12] Portfolio Media, Inc. 648 Broadway, Suite 200 New York, NY 10012 www.law360.com Phone: +1 212 537 6331 Fax: +1 212 537 6371 customerservice@portfoliomedia.com The Significance Of Travelers V. Bailey Law360,

More information

Case 2:14-cv-00797-BMS Document 16 Filed 02/06/15 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MEMORANDUM

Case 2:14-cv-00797-BMS Document 16 Filed 02/06/15 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MEMORANDUM Case 2:14-cv-00797-BMS Document 16 Filed 02/06/15 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA AMERICAN WESTERN : HOME INSURANCE COMPANY, : CIVIL ACTION Plaintiff,

More information

Henkel Corp v. Hartford Accident

Henkel Corp v. Hartford Accident 2008 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 3-27-2008 Henkel Corp v. Hartford Accident Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 06-4856 Follow

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: Chapter 11 MIDWAY GAMES INC, et al. Case No. 09-10465 (KG (Jointly Administered Debtors. THRESHOLD ENTERTAINMENT, INC, Plaintiff,

More information

Case 2:08-cv-01700-NJB-KWR Document 641 Filed 02/02/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

Case 2:08-cv-01700-NJB-KWR Document 641 Filed 02/02/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA Case 2:08-cv-01700-NJB-KWR Document 641 Filed 02/02/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ATEL MARITIME INVESTORS, LP, et al. CIVIL ACTION VERSUS CASE NO. 08-1700 SEA

More information

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS IN LIMINE. BEFORE THE COURT are Defendants Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.'s and

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS IN LIMINE. BEFORE THE COURT are Defendants Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.'s and NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS... FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COU NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXA DALLAS DIVISION GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Plaintiff, FEB 2 1 2012 CLERK, U.S. rustr1ct COURT By /n T. Deputy CIV.

More information

Case 3:07-cv-01180-TEM Document 56 Filed 04/27/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

Case 3:07-cv-01180-TEM Document 56 Filed 04/27/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION Case 3:07-cv-01180-TEM Document 56 Filed 04/27/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION JAMES E. TOMLINSON and DARLENE TOMLINSON, his wife, v. Plaintiffs,

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT. Plaintiffs-Appellants, : No. 14AP-114 (C.P.C. No. 13CVH-8575) v. :

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT. Plaintiffs-Appellants, : No. 14AP-114 (C.P.C. No. 13CVH-8575) v. : [Cite as Rose v. Primal Ability, Ltd., 2014-Ohio-3610.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT Sara L. Rose et al., : Plaintiffs-Appellants, : No. 14AP-114 (C.P.C. No. 13CVH-8575) v.

More information

Case 06-03280 Document 35 Filed in TXSB on 11/27/06 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Case 06-03280 Document 35 Filed in TXSB on 11/27/06 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Case 06-03280 Document 35 Filed in TXSB on 11/27/06 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION IN RE DAVID WIMBERLY, CASE NO. 05-81669-G3-13 Debtor,

More information

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit No. 14-3109 Sprint Communications Company, L.P. lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. 1 Elizabeth S. Jacobs; Geri D. Huser; Nick Wagner, in

More information

!El._ECTRO~ lcally FnXD

!El._ECTRO~ lcally FnXD Case 1:09-cv-00118-VM-FM Document 1232 Filed 11/22/13 Page 1 of 12 JliSD-C: si)~-)'- UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK I Dl.)'Cl" 11-""1' I L '" i 1\ i:i'i "!El._ECTRO~ lcally

More information

Determining Jurisdiction for Patent Law Malpractice Cases

Determining Jurisdiction for Patent Law Malpractice Cases Determining Jurisdiction for Patent Law Malpractice Cases This article originally appeared in The Legal Intelligencer on May 1, 2013 As an intellectual property attorney, the federal jurisdiction of patent-related

More information

NON-EXCLUSIVE SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR MICROCHIP USB FRAMEWORK SOFTWARE IMPORTANT - READ CAREFULLY.

NON-EXCLUSIVE SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR MICROCHIP USB FRAMEWORK SOFTWARE IMPORTANT - READ CAREFULLY. IMPORTANT: MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY INC. ("COMPANY") IS WILLING TO LICENSE USB FRAMEWORK SOFTWARE AND ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTATION OFFERED TO YOU ONLY ON THE CONDITION THAT YOU ACCEPT ALL OF THE FOLLOWING TERMS.

More information

Present: Carrico, C.J., Compton, Stephenson, Lacy, Keenan, Koontz, JJ., and Whiting, Senior Justice NORTHBROOK PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

Present: Carrico, C.J., Compton, Stephenson, Lacy, Keenan, Koontz, JJ., and Whiting, Senior Justice NORTHBROOK PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY Present: Carrico, C.J., Compton, Stephenson, Lacy, Keenan, Koontz, JJ., and Whiting, Senior Justice VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY OPINION BY JUSTICE LAWRENCE L. KOONTZ, v. Record No. 951919 September

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA M. REED HOPPER, Cal. Bar No. 1 E-mail: mrh@pacificlegal.org ANTHONY L. FRANÇOIS, Cal. Bar No. 0 E-mail: alf@pacificlegal.org Pacific Legal Foundation Sacramento, California Telephone: ( -1 Facsimile: (

More information

No. 103,175 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

No. 103,175 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS SYLLABUS BY THE COURT No. 103,175 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS THE ESTATE OF LUKE A. NILGES, JO ANN NILGES, and WAYNE NILGES, Appellants, v. SHAWNEE GUN SHOP, INC., d/b/a THE BULLET HOLE, Appellee. SYLLABUS

More information

Indemnity Clauses. Just boilerplate, right?

Indemnity Clauses. Just boilerplate, right? Indemnity Clauses Just boilerplate, right? Indemnity The obligation resting on one person to make good any loss or damage another has incurred or may incur by acting at his request or for his benefit,

More information

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit NOTE: Pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 47.6, this disposition is not citable as precedent. It is a public record. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 05-1452 PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION,

More information

Are Temp Nurses Hospital Employees For Insurance Policies?

Are Temp Nurses Hospital Employees For Insurance Policies? Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Are Temp Nurses Hospital Employees For Insurance Policies?

More information

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE BETWEEN MARK LONG AND THE STATE OF OREGON RECITALS

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE BETWEEN MARK LONG AND THE STATE OF OREGON RECITALS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE BETWEEN MARK LONG AND THE STATE OF OREGON RECITALS A. Mark Long (hereinafter Plaintiff ) is an employee with the Oregon Department of Consumer and Business Services. The

More information

Case 0:14-cv-62840-JIC Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2015 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 0:14-cv-62840-JIC Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2015 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case 0:14-cv-62840-JIC Document 44 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2015 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY, v. Plaintiff, KELLEY VENTURES, LLC, KEVIN P. KELLEY, and PHOENIX MOTORS, INC.,

More information

Case 2:13-cv-02349-ILRL-KWR Document 31 Filed 02/26/14 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA VERSUS NO.

Case 2:13-cv-02349-ILRL-KWR Document 31 Filed 02/26/14 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA VERSUS NO. Case 2:13-cv-02349-ILRL-KWR Document 31 Filed 02/26/14 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA PUBLIC PAYPHONE COMPANY CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 13-2349 WAL-MART STORES, INC.

More information

Case 1:03-cv-00630-RHB Document 92 Filed 02/17/2006 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 1:03-cv-00630-RHB Document 92 Filed 02/17/2006 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION Case 1:03-cv-00630-RHB Document 92 Filed 02/17/2006 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION J.B. LABORATORIES, INC., a Michigan Corporation, v. Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,

More information

Case 4:08-cv-00142-MHS-ALM Document 58 Filed 06/30/2009 Page 1 of 9

Case 4:08-cv-00142-MHS-ALM Document 58 Filed 06/30/2009 Page 1 of 9 Case 4:08-cv-00142-MHS-ALM Document 58 Filed 06/30/2009 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Case No. 4:08-CV-142

More information

The Rise in Qui Tam False Patent Marking Litigation

The Rise in Qui Tam False Patent Marking Litigation The Rise in Qui Tam False Patent Marking Litigation September 13, 2010 Jason C. White 1 Issues Addressed False Patent Marking Background Forest Group v. Bon Tool Decision Increase in False Marking Lawsuits

More information

ATTORNEY CONSULTATION AND FEE CONTRACT FOR CONTINGENCY CASES

ATTORNEY CONSULTATION AND FEE CONTRACT FOR CONTINGENCY CASES 109 N. Palafox Street Telephone (850) 434-8904 Pensacola, Florida 32502 Fax (850) 434-8922 ATTORNEY CONSULTATION AND FEE CONTRACT FOR CONTINGENCY CASES THIS FEE CONTRACT FOR CONTINGENCY CASES ("Contract")

More information

Case 1:10-cv-10170-NMG Document 38 Filed 06/15/11 Page 1 of 9. United States District Court District of Massachusetts MEMORANDUM & ORDER

Case 1:10-cv-10170-NMG Document 38 Filed 06/15/11 Page 1 of 9. United States District Court District of Massachusetts MEMORANDUM & ORDER Case 1:10-cv-10170-NMG Document 38 Filed 06/15/11 Page 1 of 9 WESTERN WORLD INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff, v. JAMES CZECH and WILLIAMS BUILDING COMPANY, INC., Defendants. United States District Court

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 1 1 1 1 1 1 In the Matter of the Agreed Case: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, and LYON FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., doing business as U.S. BANCORP BUSINESS

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 96-11081. Plaintiff - Counter Defendant - Appellant

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 96-11081. Plaintiff - Counter Defendant - Appellant IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-11081 SAVE POWER LIMITED Plaintiff - Counter Defendant - Appellant v. SYNTEK FINANCE CORP Defendant - Counter Claimant - Appellee Appeals

More information

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY UPDATE

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY UPDATE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY UPDATE May 2007 1 Hogan & Hartson LLP INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY UPDATE Supreme Court Holds That 35 U.S.C. 271(f) Does Not Apply To Golden Master Disks In a decision handed down April

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued April 19, 2016 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-15-00361-CV FREDDIE L. WALKER, Appellant V. RISSIE OWENS, PRESIDING OFFICER OF THE TEXAS BOARD OF PARDONS AND

More information

Digital Music Distribution Agreement between You (Licensor) and VIDYPS 79 (Licensee Owner of Blue2Digital)

Digital Music Distribution Agreement between You (Licensor) and VIDYPS 79 (Licensee Owner of Blue2Digital) Digital Music Distribution Agreement between You (Licensor) and VIDYPS 79 (Licensee Owner of Blue2Digital) This Agreement was last updated on September 01, 2012. THE MAIN TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT IN A NUTSHELL:

More information

AGREEMENT OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE AS TO LYON FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., d/b/a U.S. BANCORP BUSINESS EQUIPMENT FINANCE GROUP

AGREEMENT OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE AS TO LYON FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., d/b/a U.S. BANCORP BUSINESS EQUIPMENT FINANCE GROUP AGREEMENT OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE AS TO LYON FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., d/b/a U.S. BANCORP BUSINESS EQUIPMENT FINANCE GROUP The STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

More information

Determining Tax Liability Under Section 505(a) of the Bankruptcy Code

Determining Tax Liability Under Section 505(a) of the Bankruptcy Code Determining Tax Liability Under Section 505(a) of the Bankruptcy Code Section 505(a) of the Bankruptcy Code (the Code ) provides the means by which a debtor or trustee in bankruptcy may seek a determination

More information

Case 6:10-cv-01071-DNH-ATB Document 76-1 Filed 08/22/11 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 6:10-cv-01071-DNH-ATB Document 76-1 Filed 08/22/11 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Case 6:10-cv-01071-DNH-ATB Document 76-1 Filed 08/22/11 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ONEIDA NATION OF NEW YORK, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 6:10-CV-1071

More information

Case 1:13-cv-03116-LGS Document 131 Filed 06/24/15 Page 1 of 14 ) ) ) ) ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT

Case 1:13-cv-03116-LGS Document 131 Filed 06/24/15 Page 1 of 14 ) ) ) ) ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT Case 1:13-cv-03116-LGS Document 131 Filed 06/24/15 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN RE DELCATH SYSTEMS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION ) ) ) ) USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY

More information

Proposals for Settlement: How to draft ones that will stick and how to deal with them when they land on your desk By Ellen K. Lyons and Gary M.

Proposals for Settlement: How to draft ones that will stick and how to deal with them when they land on your desk By Ellen K. Lyons and Gary M. Proposals for Settlement: How to draft ones that will stick and how to deal with them when they land on your desk By Ellen K. Lyons and Gary M. Pappas Originally presented May 2006, but information is

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Case: 13-20512 Document: 00512673150 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/23/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED June 23, 2014 Lyle W.

More information

Illinois Official Reports

Illinois Official Reports Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Certain Underwriters at Lloyd s London v. The Burlington Insurance Co., 2015 IL App (1st) 141408 Appellate Court Caption CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD S LONDON,

More information

NASDAQ Futures, Inc. Off-Exchange Reporting Broker Agreement

NASDAQ Futures, Inc. Off-Exchange Reporting Broker Agreement 2. Access to the Services. a. The Exchange may issue to the Authorized Customer s security contact person, or persons (each such person is referred to herein as an Authorized Security Administrator ),

More information

Interactive Brokers Hong Kong Agreement for Advisors Providing Services to Interactive Brokers Clients

Interactive Brokers Hong Kong Agreement for Advisors Providing Services to Interactive Brokers Clients Interactive Brokers Hong Kong Agreement for Advisors Providing Services to Interactive Brokers Clients This Agreement is entered into between Interactive Brokers Hong Kong Ltd ("IB") and the undersigned

More information

Case 2:14-cv-01214-DGC Document 38 Filed 08/25/14 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Case 2:14-cv-01214-DGC Document 38 Filed 08/25/14 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Case :-cv-0-dgc Document Filed 0// Page of 0 WO Wintrode Enterprises Incorporated, v. PSTL LLC, et al., IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Plaintiff, Defendants. No. CV--0-PHX-DGC

More information

Master Software Purchase Agreement

Master Software Purchase Agreement Master Software Purchase Agreement This Master Software Purchase Agreement ( Agreement ) is entered into as of Wednesday, March 12, 2014 (the Effective Date ) by and between with principal offices at (

More information

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT ONE SOUTH OCEAN DRIVE 2000, LTD., a Florida limited partnership and ONE OCEAN PLAZA 2001, LTD., a Florida limited partnership, Appellants,

More information

Case 5:14-cv-00141-XR Document 37 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 7

Case 5:14-cv-00141-XR Document 37 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 7 Case 5:14-cv-00141-XR Document 37 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION TAMMY FABIAN, v. Plaintiffs, CAROLYN COLVIN, Commissioner

More information

Courtroom: 19 FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Courtroom: 19 FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE DISTRICT COURT, CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO City and County Building, Room 256 1437 Bannock Street Denver, CO 80202 Plaintiff: RAYMOND AND SALLY MILLER, ET AL., on behalf of themselves and all

More information

LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR TOBII ANALYTICS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT KIT AND API

LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR TOBII ANALYTICS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT KIT AND API LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR TOBII ANALYTICS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT KIT AND API PREAMBLE This Tobii Analytics Software Development Kit and API License Agreement (the "Agreement") forms a legally binding contract

More information

CCH INCORPORATED, A WOLTERSKLUWER COMPANY ACCESS AGREEMENT FOR THE

CCH INCORPORATED, A WOLTERSKLUWER COMPANY ACCESS AGREEMENT FOR THE CCH INCORPORATED, A WOLTERSKLUWER COMPANY ACCESS AGREEMENT FOR THE Accounting Research Manager INFORMATION DATABASE PROVIDED THROUGH Mayer Hoffman McCann P.C. ("AGREEMENT" OR "ACCESS AGREEMENT") IN THIS

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Case: 09-20311 Document: 00511062202 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/25/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D March 25, 2010 Charles

More information