More info…
(U.S. 8th Cir., Civil Procedure, Class Actions, Per Curiam) Dismissal of a claim for failure to prosecute is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff did not challenge this dismissal on the merits; 2) because plaintiff’s claims have been dismissed with prejudice, reversing the denial of class certification would afford plaintiff no relief; and 3) as its claims have been dismissed, plaintiff is no longer a member of and therefore cannot represent the putative but uncertified class.
lawyer in tampa
More info…
(U.S. 9th Cir., Antitrust & Trade Regulation, Commercial Law, Evidence, Health Law, Intellectual Property, Patent) In a suit against a brand-name and a generic drug manufacturer alleging restraint-of-trade and monopolization of the market for a blood pressure medication, judgment for defendants is affirmed in part over plaintiff’s evidentiary challenges, but reversed in part where plaintiff produced sufficient evidence to go to trial on its claim that defendant had violated the Sherman Act by enforcing a patent obtained through fraud.
Taco Bell Corp. v. TBWA Chiat/Day Inc.
(U.S. 9th Cir., Contracts, Entertainment Law, Food & Beverages, Intellectual Property, Media Law, Remedies) In a suit against an advertising agency seeking indemnification for damages entered against plaintiff in a suit based on plaintiff’s breach of an implied contract for using a third party’s Chihuahua character in advertising developed by defendant, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where the evidence only showed fault for the previous liability on the part of plaintiff, thus defendant owed no duty to indemnify.
Ricoh Co. v. Quanta Computer Inc.
(U.S. Fed. Cir., Intellectual Property, Patent) In a patent-infringement case, summary judgment dismissing all claims against defendant is affirmed in part but vacated in part where the district court applied erroneous legal standards for assessing: (1) whether defendant contributorily infringed two patents and (2) whether co-defendant induced infringement of the two patents.
accident attorney tampa
More info…
(U.S. 10th Cir., Civil Procedure, ERISA, Insurance Law, Labor & Employment Law) In litigation concerned a health-insurance plan plaintiff, a professional employer organization providing payroll and health insurance services, purchased to cover its clients and employees, dismissal of the case without prejudice for lack of prosecution is affirmed where: 1) there was no abuse of discretion in the decision to dismiss without prejudice; 2) the circuit court adopts a prudential rule allowing the appellate court to review an interlocutory order preceding a dismissal for failure to prosecute in rare cases when it makes sense to do so; and 3) this was not one of the rare cases.
estate attorney tampa
More info…
(U.S. Fed. Cir., Intellectual Property, Patent) In a patent-infringement case, summary judgment dismissing all claims against defendant is affirmed in part but vacated in part where the district court applied erroneous legal standards for assessing: (1) whether defendant contributorily infringed two patents and (2) whether co-defendant induced infringement of the two patents.
Taco Bell Corp. v. TBWA Chiat/Day Inc.
(U.S. 9th Cir., Contracts, Entertainment Law, Food & Beverages, Intellectual Property, Media Law, Remedies) In a suit against an advertising agency seeking indemnification for damages entered against plaintiff in a suit based on plaintiff’s breach of an implied contract for using a third party’s Chihuahua character in advertising developed by defendant, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where the evidence only showed fault for the previous liability on the part of plaintiff, thus defendant owed no duty to indemnify.
Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. v. Cordis Corp.
(U.S. Fed. Cir., Drugs & Biotech, Health Law, Intellectual Property, Patent) In a patent case involving a drug-eluting expandable stent with a coating that has a non-thrombogenic surface, denial of defendant’s motion for a new trial and judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) following a jury verdict of infringement of a patent claim is reversed where the district court erred as a matter of law in failing to hold the patent at issue to have been obvious.
Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. King Mountain Tobacco Co., Inc.
(U.S. 9th Cir., Civil Procedure, Cyberspace Law, Indian Law, Intellectual Property, Trademark) In a suit alleging trademark violations against a tribal corporation for cigarette packages, the district court’s grant of a stay while the tribal court determined its jurisdiction is reversed where the tribal court does not have colorable jurisdiction over plaintiff-nonmember’s federal and state claims for trademark infringement on the Internet and beyond the reservation.
tampa lawyer
External articles | SEO-FSER | 
January 29, 2009 5:55 am | 
Comments (0) 
Subscribe