WASHINGTON, D.C. - A law firm's study of asbestos personal injury claim evidence in the Chapter 11 case of Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC "shows widespread inconsistencies in the information single asbestos plaintiffs provide to the different" asbestos bankruptcy trusts, according to a Feb. 19 news release by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institute for Legal Reform (ILR).
SAN FRANCISCO - A shareholder filed a securities class action complaint in California federal court on Feb. 18, seeking to halt a company's proposed merger until the details of the merger plan are disseminated to stockholders as a result of the defendants' alleged misstatements made in the merger plan documents (Brent Talbert v. Mattson Technology Inc., et al., No. 16-0811, N.D. Calif.).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. - The same day that a California federal magistrate judge issued an order compelling Apple Inc. to "unlock" a cellular phone owned by one of the shooters in the December San Bernardino, Calif., attack, Apple on Feb. 16 released a public statement asserting its opposition to the order out of a concern for privacy and security from technology and a precedent that "would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect" (In the matter of the search of an Apple iPhone seized during the execution of a search warrant on a Black Lexus IS300, California License Plate 35KGD203, No. 5:15-mj-00451, C.D. Calif.).
NEW YORK - An injunction issued by a New York federal judge that prohibited the distribution of copyrighted television content over the Internet was violated by "Teleporter" remote storage digital video recording (DVR) technology, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Feb. 16 (CBS Broadcasting Inc., et al. v. FilmOn.com Inc., et al., No. 14-3123, 2nd Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 2609).
SAN FRANCISCO - Plaintiffs who sued Uber Technologies Inc. and Raiser LLC in California federal court over the ride-share service's "Safe Rides Fee" filed a stipulation of settlement on Feb. 11 stating that the defendants have agreed to pay $28.5 million to end the class action complaint and will rename the fee as well as change the advertising wording regarding safety (Matthew Philliben, et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., et al., No. 14-5615, N.D. Calif.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A federal judge in the District of Columbia on Feb. 10 denied the Office of Science and Technology Policy's (OSTP) request to apply the consultant corollary exception of the deliberative process privilege to a five-page draft of a letter that was shared with a Rutgers University professor who believes that global warming has spurred a phenomenon known as the "polar vortex," finding that the professor could not be likened to a government employee and that her opinion was not being sought to assist the office with forming a policy position (Competitive Enterprise Institute v. Office of Science and Technology Policy, No. 14-cv-01806, D. D.C.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15893).
CENTRAL ISLIP, N.Y. - The lead defendant in a securities fraud class action failed to fulfill its duty to preserve relevant emails despite being on notice of litigation, the lead pension fund plaintiff asserts in a Feb. 5 motion for sanctions in New York federal court, seeking implementation of an adverse inference in its favor (In re Symbol Technologies Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 2:05-CV-03923, E.D. N.Y.).
MARSHALL, Texas - A telecommunications plaintiff's expert in a patent infringement lawsuit does not rely on a previously rejected doctrine of equivalents theory, a Texas federal magistrate judge held Feb. 5, refusing to strike paragraphs from the expert's report (Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC v. LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., Inc., No. 13-947, E.D. Texas; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13881).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - Data storage firm Seagate Technology LLC was hit with a putative class complaint Feb. 1 in California federal court, as a South Dakota man alleged unfair competition, false advertising and breach of warranty related to purportedly defective hard disk drives (Christopher A. Nelson v. Seagate Technology LLC, No. 5:15-cv-00523, N.D. Calif.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Only the third-party requester of an inter partes re-examination (IPR) can appeal the outcome of the proceedings, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Jan. 29 (Agilent Technologies Inc. v. Waters Technology Corp., No. 15-1280, Fed. Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1441).
LANSING, Mich. - A political advocacy group in Michigan on Jan. 28 released emails that show that in January 2015, officials in the state government were concerned enough with the water quality in Flint, Mich., that the Michigan Department of Technology, Management and Budget (DTMB) agreed to provide water coolers for government workers in the city, while at the same time another state agency was telling residents that the water was safe to drink.
SAN DIEGO - A California federal judge on Jan. 25 partially granted a motion to strike class claims for violation of the California Labor Code and the unfair competition law (UCL) asserted by a former employee of technology entities, allowing his representative claim for violation of the Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) and injunctive relief to proceed (Howard Rosenstein, individually and on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Pratt and Whitney, et al., No. 15cv2183, S.D. Calif.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8442).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. - Frequent asbestos personal injury defendant John Crane Inc. on Jan. 25 sought permission in North Carolina federal court to intervene in two fraud and racketeering cases filed by Chapter 11 debtor Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC against plaintiff law firms and attorneys in order to pursue its own fraud claims against the firms (Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC, et al. v. Shein Law Center, Ltd., et al., No. 14-137, Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC, et al. v. Simon Greenstone Panatier Bartlett, APLC, et al., No. 14-116, W.D. N.C.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Although finding no error in a New York federal judge's decision to deem a patent infringement case exceptional, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Jan. 22 found that the judge failed to properly justify the manner in which her award of attorney fees was calculated (Lumen View Technology Inc. v. FindTheBest.com Inc., Nos. 15-1275, -1235, Fed. Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1087).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In what has become a hotly contested issue before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, the U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 15 granted a petition for certiorari in a dispute that poses the question of whether decisions to grant inter partes review (IPR) are themselves reviewable (Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Michelle K. Lee, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, Patent and Trademark Office, No. 15-446, U.S. Sup.).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. - The confirmation hearing for the Chapter 11 plan of reorganization of Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC has been pushed back two months, according to an amended case management order filed Jan. 13 in North Carolina federal bankruptcy court (In re: Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC, et al., No. 10-31607, W.D. N.C. Bkcy.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A Doe defendant on Jan. 14 was granted a protective order staying a subpoena by Uber Technologies Inc. on an Internet service provider (ISP) seeking the Doe's identity, with a California federal magistrate finding that an appeal of a parallel subpoena in a related suit over the same data breach will likely affect the present subpoena (Sasha Antman v. Uber Technologies Inc., et al., No. 3:15-cv-01175, N.D. Calif.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5032).
LOS ANGELES - A federal judge in California on Jan. 4 dismissed without prejudice an environmental cleanup company's claims for breach of contract, accounts stated and open book account against BP America Inc. in a lawsuit accusing BP of failing to pay the company $1.7 million for cleanup activities it conducted in the Gulf of Mexico following the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in April 2010, finding that the plaintiff company failed to adequately state the claims (Advanced Cleanup Technologies Inc. v. BP America Inc., et al., No. 14-cv-09033, C.D. Calif.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1192).