DETROIT - An expert may offer damages testimony on behalf of Garmin International Inc. in a patent infringement lawsuit concerning car navigational methods, a Michigan federal judge ruled Sept. 12 (Visteon Global Technologies Inc. and Visteon Technologies LLC v. Garmin International Inc., No. 10-10578, E.D. Mich.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122922).
NEW YORK - Parties that sued to enforce a $7.8 million judgment in their favor told a federal court in New York on Sept. 12 that the court holds jurisdiction over the party the judgment was against (AmTrust North America, Inc. and Technology Insurance Company, Inc., as judgment creditors of Pacific Re, Inc. on behalf of its protected cell Pac Re 5-AT v. Safebuilt Insurance Services Inc., No. 16-cv-06033, S.D. N.Y.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal court had no authority to rule on the enforceability of arbitration agreements entered into between Uber Technologies Inc. and its drivers except as to a representative claim under California's Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Sept. 7 (Abdul Kadir Mohamed, et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., et al., Nos. 15-16178 and 15-16250, Ronald Gillette v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 15-16181, 9th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 16413).
WILMINGTON, Del. - Efforts by a patent infringement defendant to obtain dismissal of allegations that it infringed four patents were unsuccessful on Sept. 7 when a Delaware federal judge found that it remains unclear whether the patents in suit are invalid under 35 U.S. Code Section 101 (JSDQ Mesh Technologies LLC v. Fluidmesh Networks LLC, No. 16-212, D. Del.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119811).
DENVER - The 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 31 refused to rehear a Chinese company's appeal of a decision to dismiss its petition to confirm an arbitral award that was issued in its favor, denying its petition for rehearing en banc (CEEG [Shanghai] Solar Science & Technology Co., Ltd. v. Lumos Solar LLC, No. 15-1256, 10th Cir.).
NEW YORK - An alleged party to a captive reinsurance agreement told a federal court in New York on Aug. 29 that the court does not hold jurisdiction over it and cross-moved for the dismissal of a case brought to force the party to pay a judgment from another suit (AmTrust North America, Inc. and Technology Insurance Company, Inc., as judgment creditors of Pacific Re, Inc. on behalf of its protected cell Pac Re 5-AT v. Safebuilt Insurance Services Inc., No. 16-cv-06033, S.D. N.Y.).
ST. LOUIS - Hourly manufacturing employees are not owed compensation for time spent donning and doffing work clothing because that time was excluded from measured working time in an implied-in-fact bona fide collective bargaining agreement between the employer and union representing the workers, the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Aug. 23 (David J. Jackson, et al. v. Old EPT, LLC, also known as EaglePicher Technologies, LLC, No. 15-1078, 8th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 15416).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A Delaware federal judge's decision to invalidate a semiconductor wafer patent as anticipated was vacated and remanded Aug. 19 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which cited the existence of genuine issues of material fact that should have precluded summary judgment (Semcon Tech LLC v. Micron Technology Inc., No. 15-1936, Fed. Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 15233).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal judge on Aug. 18 denied preliminary approval for a second time of a $100 million settlement between Uber Technologies Inc. and its drivers, who allege in two lawsuits that they have been misclassified as independent contractors, finding that, despite supplemental briefing, "the Settlement as a whole is not fair, adequate, and reasonable" (Douglas O'Connor, et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., et al., No. 13-3826, Hakan Yucesoy, et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., et al., No. 15-262, N.D. Calif.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. - Efforts by an infringement defendant to invalidate a patented method of gathering and presenting summary information as HyperText Markup Language (HTML) were unsuccessful on Aug. 16, when the Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied a petition for covered business method (CBM) review (Plaid Technologies Inc. v. Yodlee Inc. and Yodlee.com Inc., No. CBM2016-00037, PTAB).
SAN FRANCISCO - In a patent infringement lawsuit concerning computer security technology, a damages expert's apportionment methodology is unreliable as it improperly inflates the apportionment base, a California federal judge ruled Aug. 15, partially excluding the testimony (Finjan Inc. v. Sophos Inc., No. 14-01197, N.D. Calif.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107831).
CINCINNATI - A plaintiff sufficiently alleged that the developer of software that was used to intercept and record his communications was an active participant in these actions, a Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel majority found Aug. 16, reversing a trial court's ruling that dismissed the plaintiff's claims under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) for failure to state a claim (Javier Luis v. Awareness Technologies, et al., No. 14-3601, 6th Cir.).
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), New York University (NYU) and Yale University were sued Aug. 9 in separate putative class action lawsuits on behalf of more than 60,000 employees in their defined contribution retirement plans who claim that the universities, as plan sponsors, breached their duties of loyalty and prudence under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by causing plan participants to pay millions of dollars in unreasonable and excessive administrative fees.
BALTIMORE - A plaintiff's decision to pursue patent litigation became "clearly unreasonable" once the plaintiff failed to adequately rebut or otherwise address a defendant's position that the case was barred by 28 U.S. Code Section 1498, a Maryland federal judge ruled Aug. 4 (Astornet Technologies Inc. v. BAE Systems Inc., No. 14-245, D. Md.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102260).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's rejection in June of the two-part test for enhanced damages set forth in In re: Seagate Technology LLC (497 F. 3d 1360, 1371 ), the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 5 vacated an award of unenhanced damages in a patent case and remanded the dispute to a Nevada federal court (Halo Electronics Inc. v. Pulse Electronics Inc., et al., Nos. 13-1472, -1656, Fed. Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 14366).
SEATTLE - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 3 affirmed a lower federal court's ruling that a directors and officers liability insurer has no duty to defend its insured against an underlying lawsuit arising from the insured's termination of a technology license agreement (TLA), finding that coverage is barred by the policy's contractual liability exclusion (X2 Biosystems Inc. v. Federal Insurance Co., No. 14-35125, 9th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 14153).
NEW YORK - Uncertain as to whether the claims for which an insured is liable are related to damages to window wall systems themselves or to other property owned by the condominium unit owners, a New York federal judge on Aug. 2 denied summary judgment to an insurer on the duty to defend and indemnify an underlying action (American Home Assurance Co. v. Allan Window Technologies, Ltd., No. 15-5138, S.D. N.Y.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101118).
SAN FRANCISCO - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 29 affirmed the dismissal of claims for violation of California's unfair competition (UCL) in relation to a contract for the supply of polysilicon based on forum non conveniens (Adema Technologies Inc., et al. v. Wacker Chemical Corp., et al., No. 14-16618, 9th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 13742).
KNOXVILLE, Tenn. - Cemex Inc. entered into proposed consent decree in Tennessee federal court on July 27 in which it agreed to invest approximately $10 million on technology to cut emissions of nitrogen oxide at five of its cement manufacturing plants to resolve alleged violations of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and pay a $1.6 million civil penalty (United States of America, et al. v. Cemex Inc., et al., No. 16-cv-471, E.D. Tenn.).
DENVER - The 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 19 affirmed dismissal of a Chinese company's petition to confirm an arbitral award issued in its favor, finding that the other party did not receive sufficient notice of the arbitration in China, rendering the arbitration invalid under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (CEEG [Shanghai] Solar Science & Technology Co., Ltd., No. 15-1256, 10th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 13192).
SHERMAN, Texas - An infringement plaintiff's affirmative defenses of unclean hands and estoppel in response to a defendant's counterclaim for cancellation of various trademarks were properly rejected by a Texas federal magistrate judge, a Texas federal judge concluded July 16 (Neal Technologies Inc. v. Unite Motorsports Inc., No. 15-385, E.D. Texas; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92655).