Search Results

Clark v. Hanley

Publication Date: 2024-01-04
Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Civil Rights
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Judge: Chief Judge Debra Ann Livingston
Attorneys: For plaintiff: For Plaintiff-Appellant: Andrew D. Silverman, Jennifer M. Keighley, on the brief, Alexandra Bursak, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, New York, NY.
for defendant: For Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc., The Amicus Project at UConn Law, Just Detention International, and Center for Constitutional Rights, as amici curiae: Sasha Buchert and Richard Saenz, Lambda Legal, Washington D.C. and New York, NY. For Amicus Project at UConn Law, as amicus curiae: Richard Luedeman, Assistant Clinical Professor of Law, UConn School of Law, Hartford, CT. For Defendants-Appellees: Wilson T. Carroll, on the brief, Stuart M. Katz, Cohen and Wolf, P.C., Bridgeport, CT, on behalf of Defendant-Appellee Thomas Hanley. For William Tong, Attorney General, Connecticut Office of the Attorney General, Hartford, CT, on behalf of Defendants-Appellees Kevin Manley, Peter Murphy, Kimberly Weir, Roberto Quiros, Jane and John Does 1-9: Zenobia G. Graham-Days, Assistant Attorney General.
Case Number: 22-302

Circuit Upholds Denial of Tolling, Dismissal of Inmate's Rights Action as Time-Barred

February 3, 2023 | Law.com

Patent Litigation Against Automakers Gives Standing to Non-Party Supplier, Judge Says

"The specific circumstances of this case—and, more importantly, of Westport's allegations against Bosch's customers—indicates that there is a 'substantial controversy' between Bosch and Westport, that is of 'sufficient immediacy and reality to warrant the issuance of a declaratory judgment.' ... Bosch has met the Article III requirements to bring this declaratory judgment action," Judge Rossie D. Alston Jr. said.

5 minute read

October 23, 2019 | Supreme Court Brief

Your Views on New Amicus Guidance | One-Word Affirmances? Tell Us More | 'A Line and a Lesson for Our Democracy'

We asked for your thoughts on the Supreme Court's new amicus guidance, and here is what some appellate veterans told us. Plus: a new petition questions the Federal Circuit's one-word "affirmances." And scroll down for our headline roundup. Thanks for reading!

1 minute read

March 27, 2017 | New York Law Journal

Scope of Estoppel Post-IPR Proceedings Becoming Clearer

A. Antony Pfeffer and K. Patrick Herman of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe write: While 35 U.S.C. §315(e)(1) has been interpreted relatively narrowly, the decision in 'Verinata Health v. Ariosa

1 minute read

February 21, 2017 | The Recorder

Obama Puts Stamp on Patent Litigation With Northern District of Calif. Appointees

Introduction Although President Barack Obama's time in office is complete, his impact on patent litigation in the Northern District of California is only beg

1 minute read

PPC Broadband, Inc. v. Corning Optical Communications RF, LLC, 5:11-cv-761

Publication Date: 2017-02-15
Practice Area:
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court, Northern District
Judge: District Judge Gary Sharpe
Attorneys: For plaintiff: For The Plaintiff: John T. Gutkoski, Esq., of Counsel, Barclay Damon LLP, Boston, MA. Bella S. Satra, Esq., of Counsel, Albany, NY. Douglas J. Nash, Esq., Gabriel M. Nugent, Esq., John D. Cook, Esq., Kathryn Daley Cornish, Esq., Mark E. Galvez, Esq., of Counsel, Barclay Damon Tower, Syracuse, NY.
for defendant: For The Defendant: Andrew D. Silverman, Esq., Daniel A. Rubens, Esq., of Counsel, Orrick, Herrington Law Firm, New York, NY. Mark S. Davies, Esq., of Counsel, Washington, DC. Kathryn R. Grasso, Esq., Stephen J. Gombita, Esq., Joseph P. Lavelle, Esq., Andrew N. Stein, Esq., of Counsel, DLA Piper LLP, Washington, DC. Susan N. Acquista, Esq., of Counsel, San Diego, CA. Jerauld E. Brydges, Esq., Erika N.D. Stanat, Esq., of Counsel, Harter, Secrest Law Firm, Rochester, NY.
Case Number: 5:11-cv-761

Cite as: PPC Broa Inc. v. Corning Optical Communications RF, LLC, 5:11-cv-761, NYLJ 1202779036885, at *1 (NDNY, Decided February 3, 2017) CASENAME PPC Broa

March 9, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Patent Exhaustion, Vodka, Ranch Houses, Monkey Selfies

We report on an en banc decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit clarifying the law of patent exhaustion, trademark cases involving Stolichnaya vodka and canvas tote b

1 minute read

High Point Design, LLC v. LM Ins. Corp., 14-cv-7878

Publication Date: 2016-02-09
Practice Area:
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court, Southern District
Judge: District Judge Katherine Forrest
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 14-cv-7878

Cite as: High Point Design, LLC v. LM Ins. Corp., 14-cv-7878, NYLJ 1202749065840, at *1 (SDNY, Decided February 3, 2016) CASENAME High Point Design, LLC, Plain

Canon Inc. v. Tesseron Ltd., 14cv5462

Publication Date: 2015-12-01
Practice Area:
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court, Southern District
Judge: District Judge Denise Cote
Attorneys: For plaintiff: For plaintiffs Canon Inc. and Canon U.S.A., Inc.: Joseph A. Calvaruso Lisa T. Simpson Richard F. Martinelli Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, New York, NY.
for defendant: For defendants Tesseron Ltd., Industrial Print Technologies L.L.C., and Forrest P. Gauthier: Steven C. Schroer Fitch Even Tabin & Flannery LLP, Boulder, CO. Jared E. Hedman, Fitch Even Tabin & Flannery LLP, Chicago, IL. Cary Kappel, Davidson, Davidson & Kappel, LLC, New York, NY.
Case Number: 14cv5462

Cite as: Canon Inc. v. Tesseron Ltd., 14cv5462, NYLJ 1202743486311, at *1 (SDNY, Decided November 19, 2015) CASENAME Canon Inc. and Canon U.S.A., Inc., Plainti

August 4, 2014 | New York Law Journal

Patent Act Fee Shifting Decisions Focus on Discretion, Deference

The increasing volume and cost of defending patent litigation, especially in cases brought by non-practicing entities (NPEs), is reaching an all-time high. All too often, however, when faced

1 minute read