ORLANDO, Fla. - An expert has not demonstrated any reliable basis on which he can opine on how long it would take for a saw manufacturer to incorporate flesh-detection technology into a consumer-ready benchtop table saw, a Florida federal judge ruled Sept. 3, excluding in part the expert's testimony (Erik Bruskotter v. Robert Bosch Tool Corp., No. 13-1841, M.D. Fla.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117664).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. - A broad discovery request by Chapter 11 debtor Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC seeking information from 24 asbestos personal injury trusts and claims-processing facilities is an integral part of Garlock's attempt to establish a pattern of racketeering activity by an asbestos plaintiffs' law firm, a North Carolina federal judge held Sept. 3 in overruling the law firm's objections to a magistrate's approval of the discovery (Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC v. Belluck & Fox, LLP, et al., No. 3:14-cv-118, W.D. N.C.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A Virginia federal judge properly deemed "compliance mechanism" a means-plus-function term that lacks sufficient structure as it is used in a patent covering a method for preventing unauthorized recordings, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Sept. 4 (Media Rights Technologies Inc. v. Capital One Financial Corporation, et al., No. 14-1218, Fed. Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15767).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal judge on Sept. 1 partially certified a class of drivers who have driven in California for Uber Technologies Inc. and allege that they were improperly classified as independent contractors and denied reimbursement for all necessary expenditures, as well the full amount of gratuity left by customers (Douglas O'Connor, et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 13-3826, N.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116482).
WILMINGTON, Del. - A Delaware federal judge on Sept. 2 granted myriad infringement defendants judgment on the pleadings, deeming an asserted patent invalid under Section 101 of the Patent Act (Novo Transforma Technologies LLC v. Sprint Spectrum L.P. et al., Nos. 14-612, -613, -614, -615, -616, D. Del.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116647).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. - Allegations made by Chapter 11 debtor Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC in complaints filed against asbestos plaintiffs' attorneys and law firms are "more than adequate to state a claim for fraud," a North Carolina federal judge held Sept. 2 in denying motions to dismiss the complaints (Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC v. Simon Greenstone Panatier Bartlett, APLC, et al., No. 14-116, W.D. N.C.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117028; Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC v. Shein Law Center, Ltd., et al., No. 14-137, W.D. N.C.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117027).
HARTFORD, Conn. - An executrix's four-year delay in substituting herself as a plaintiff in an asbestos action prejudiced defendants and warranted dismissal for failure to prosecute, a Connecticut appeals court held Sept. 2 (Adrienne Brochu, executrix of the estate of Adrien Brochu v. Aesys Technologies, et al., No. AC36483, Conn. App.; 2015 Conn. App. LEXIS 314).
ATLANTA - A Georgia federal judge overseeing the Wright Conserve hip implant multidistrict litigation on Aug. 31 granted summary judgment on one claim in the first bellwether case but otherwise preserved plaintiff Robyn Christiansen's other claims of action (In Re: Wright Medical Technology Inc. Conserve Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2329, No. 12-md-2329, Robyn Christiansen v. Wright Medical Technology Incorporated, et al., MDL Docket No. 2329, No. 13-297, N.D. Ga., Atlanta Div.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115601).
INDIANAPOLIS - Citing the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on divided infringement in Limelight Networks Inc. v. Akamai Technologies Inc. (134 S. Ct. 2111 ) and a recent en banc Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling in the same case, an Indiana federal judge on Aug. 25 found that abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) for generic Alimta would indirectly infringe an Eli Lilly and Co. patent (Eli Lilly and Company v. Teva Parenteral Medicines Inc. et al., No. 10-1376, S.D. Ind.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112221).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. - Negotiations between asbestos claimants and Chapter 11 debtor Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC in a failed effort to reach a consensus on a plan of reorganization should remain confidential and out of the reach of discovery in the plan confirmation process, the claimants' committee says in an Aug. 24 motion for a protective order filed in North Carolina federal bankruptcy court (In re: Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC, No. 10-31607, W.D. N.C. Bkcy.).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A state unfair competition law (UCL) claim and portions of a fraud claim will continue against defendants accused of breach of contract for failing to deliver computers or refund the bitcoin used to pay for the merchandise, a federal judge in California ruled Aug. 14 (Pete Morici v. HashFast Technologies, et al., No. 14-87, N.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107449).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Although affirming Aug. 13 that a Texas federal judge properly determined that a patent infringement plaintiff had standing, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found that it remains unclear whether the judge abused his discretion in denying the same plaintiff leave to amend its infringement contentions against myriad defendants (Keranos LLC, et al. v. Silicon Storage Technology Inc., et al., Nos. 14-1360, -1500, Fed. Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14176).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 13 reinstated a verdict of patent infringement after finding that the jury heard "substantial evidence from which it could find that" defendant Limelight Networks Inc. "directs or controls its customers' performance of each . . . method step, such that all steps of the method are attributable to Limelight" (Akamai Technologies Inc. et al. v. Limelight Networks Inc., Nos. 09-1372, -1380, -1416, -1417, Fed. Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14175).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The International Trade Commission did not err in interpreting Section 337 of the Tariff Act, which declares the importation of infringing products unlawful, as inclusive of goods that, after importation, are used by an importer to directly infringe at the inducement of the goods' seller, a divided, en banc Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Aug. 10 (Suprema Inc. and Mentalix Inc. v. International Trade Commission and Cross Match Technologies Inc., No. 12-1170, Fed. Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13929).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. - A North Carolina federal bankruptcy judge on Aug. 5 amended his order allowing Chapter 11 debtor Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC to serve a subpoena on the Manville Personal Injury Settlement Trust for information on the more than 90,000 asbestos claimants in Garlock's bankruptcy case so the parties can conduct a preliminary exchange of information to limit the number of false positive matches of claimants in their databases (In re: Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC, No. 10-31607, W.D. N.C. Bkcy.).
DENVER - Defense counsel for Wright Medical Technology Inc. on July 31 asked a Colorado federal judge to award them $6,579 as a court-ordered sanction against a hip prosthesis plaintiff for failure to comply with the judge's practice standards (Judith Butt, et al. v. Wright Medical Technology, Inc., No. 14-3208, D. Colo.).
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. - A Illinois appeals panel on July 22 upheld the Pollution Control Board's ruling finding that the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) properly responded to public comments regarding its decision to award a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination system (NPDES) permit to a coal-fired electric generating facility and that the agency was not required to establish a case-by-case basis for determining if the energy supplier was using the best available technology for limiting its discharges of mercury (Natural resources Defense Council, et al. v. The Pollution Control Board, et al., No. 4-14-0644, Ill. App., 4th Dist.; 2015 Ill. App. LEXIS 559).
SAN FRANCISCO - In a July 20 brief opposing dismissal, a former driver for Uber Technologies Inc. asserts that he was a victim of identity theft as a result of a data breach experienced by his former employer and, therefore, he has sustained an injury sufficient to established standing to bring his class action complaint against Uber (Sasha Antman v. Uber Technologies Inc., et al., No. 3:15-cv-01175, N.D. Calif.).