Jump to Navigation


Case Summaries

Intellectual Property

[08/15] Visual Memory LLC v. NVIDIA Corporation
Reversing the district court's order finding that a patent that teaches computer memory systems variable speed and cost memory formats was ineligible subject matter and ruling that the plaintiff had failed to state a claim because an improvement to computer memory is not an abstract idea.

[08/10] AIA America, Inc. v. Avid Radiopharmaceuticals
Affirming the award of attorney's fees to the defendants because the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial does not apply to attorney's fees under the Patent Act and the district court did not err n making factual findings not foreclosed by the jury's verdict on standing and the plaintiff's due process rights were not violated.

[08/10] Amgen Inc. v. Hospira Inc.
Dismissing an appeal and denying a writ of mandamus in the case of an appeal from a district court order denying the plaintiff's motion to compel discovery in a patent infringement case because there was no jurisdiction over the district court's order under the collateral order doctrine and the plaintiff failed to meet the requirements for a mandamus claim.

[08/09] Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc.
Vacating and remanding a case where the district court granted attorney's fees under the Patent Act and the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA), but not under the Lanham Act because the incorrect standard for determining the availability of attorney's fees under the Lanham Act was applied.

Read More

Commercial Law

[08/07] Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. US
Affirming the Court of International Trade's decision affirming a Department of Commerce ruling in the administrative review of an earlier anti-dumping order, the court held that no error occurred in the determination that a Chinese saw blade manufacturer was seeking to sell their products at less than fair market value in the United States.

[08/02] US v. Stone
Affirming the district court's rulings in the case of a mortgage fraud scheme where the defendant alleged a conflict of interest but the court found that the interest was not significant and the court's judgment would not substantially affect the companies involved and because the sentence and restitution order were not an abuse of discretion.

[08/02] Olagues v. Icahn
Affirming the judgment of the District Court dismissing the plaintiff's claims seeking the disgorgement of 'short-swing' profits under the Securities Exchange Act from three companies owned by a single individual because the plaintiff had not plausibly alleged that the defendant had failed to disgorge all of the premiums he received for selling the put options at issue.

[07/28] Conroy v. Wells Fargo Bank
Affirming the dismissal of a lawsuit filed by a couple being foreclosed against alleging that there was misrepresentation and negligence associated with their contract with the lender and that the company never designated a single point of contact, as well as other contracts claims, but many of the causes of action were derivative to other causes of action that failed to plead reliance or damages and were not viable.

Read More

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.