Search Results (20004)
Documents on Litigation
Show: results per page
|Supreme Court of Ohio: 1989 Ohio Dormant Mineral Act was Not Self-Executing|
Shana Smith; Leech Tishman;
September 23, 2016, previously published on September 16, 2016On September 15, 2016, the Supreme Court of Ohio issued opinions on three cases addressing the Ohio Dormant Mineral Act, O.R.C. 5301.56 (“ODMA”) and subsequently applied the decisions to dispense with ten additional cases. Of particular importance is the Court’s ruling in Corban...
|What is a “Rule 49” Offer to Settle?|
Perley-Robertson Hill McDougall LLP/s.r.l.;
September 21, 2016, previously published on September 2, 2016The majority of legal cases settle before trial, and recent statistics show the number of settled cases to be as high as 95% in Ontario. This is likely due to Rule 49 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, which encourages and facilitates settlement by imposing costs consequences (payment of a portion of...
|Cruise Ships Miss the Boat on TCPA Compliance to the Tune of Up to $76 Million|
Thomas M. Byrne, Juan C. Garcia, Phillip E. Stano, Rocco E. Testani, Lewis S. Wiener; Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP;
September 16, 2016, previously published on August 12, 2016With a trial looming like storm clouds on the horizon, several cruise ship companies and their affiliated travel agencies settled a “robocall” Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) class action up to $76 million. The settlement, announced on September 8, 2016, was reached just weeks...
|ITC Declines to File Petition for Certiorari - CAFC Holding that ITC Does Not Have Jurisdiction over Digital Imports Stands|
Nicholas W. Armington, Aarti Shah, Daniel B. Weinger; Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.;
September 12, 2016, previously published on September 1, 2016The deadline has come and gone for the ITC and patentee Align to file petitions for certiorari seeking review by the Supreme Court of the Federal Circuit’s decision in ClearCorrect. On November 10, 2015, a panel of the Federal Circuit found that the ITC does not have jurisdiction to bar...
|Russia Expands Restrictions on Government Procurement of Foreign Software and Hardware|
Sergei Volfson; Jones Day;
September 12, 2016, previously published on September 2016Over the last few years, Russia has been expanding restrictions on government procurement of software and hardware from foreign companies.
|Federal Circuit Emphasizes that an Obviousness Analysis Based on Common Sense Must be Supported by Substantial Evidence and Explained with Sufficient Reasoning|
Andrew H. DeVoogd, Matthew A. Karambelas; Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.;
September 12, 2016, previously published on August 23, 2016A recent decision by the Federal Circuit suggests that relying on “common sense” in analyzing whether a patent is obvious in view of prior art cannot always be based on common sense alone. In a decision providing practitioners important guidance for relying on common sense in an...
|Eastern District Court of Pennsylvania Predicts Applicability of the “Bare Metal”
Defense in Pennsylvania Asbestos Litigation|
Melissa Devich Cochran; Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C.;
September 12, 2016, previously published on September 1, 2016Known in the asbestos community as the “bare metal” defense is the theory that a product manufacturer cannot be held liable for alleged harms caused by asbestos component parts used with its product when it did not manufacture, distribute or supply the component part. This theory is...
|Res IPSA Loquitur: The Thing Speaks For Itself... Unless the Thing We’re Speaking of Involves a Public Entity|
Jessica M. Anderson; Capehart & Scatchard, P.A.;
September 12, 2016, previously published on August 29, 2016Res ipsa loquitur is not available in an action against a public entity grounded upon a dangerous condition of public property. Rocco v. New Jersey Transit Rail Operations, Inc., 330 N.J. Super. 320, 339-40 (App. Div. 2000). The Tort Claims Act requires proofs beyond those necessary for a res...
|Specificity is Required to Assert an Easement|
E. Christopher Murray; Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C.;
September 12, 2016, previously published on August 2016The New York Supreme Court, Suffolk County, recently enforced the requirement that in order to assert a claim for an easement by prescription or adverse possession you must set forth the specific location and dimensions of the purported easement. In MJK Building Corp. v. Fayland Realty, Inc., Index...
Espionage and the Defend Trade Secrets Act|
Nicholas W. Armington, Bret A. Cohen, Michael T. Renaud; Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.;
September 12, 2016, previously published on August 24, 2016American corporations are facing an ever increasing threat of misappropriation of their valuable trade secrets through industrial espionage, defined as the theft of a company’s trade secrets by an actor intending to convert the trade secret to the economic benefit of a competitor. Indeed,...