Filter This View

  • In re: Walmart Inc. Sec. Litig.

    Publication Date: 2024-04-22
    Practice Area: Securities Litigation
    Industry: Retail
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sara Fuks, The Rosen Law Firm, P.A., New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Robert W. Whetzel, Raymond J. DiCamillo, John M. O'Toole, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Sean M. Berkowitz, Nicholas J. Siciliano, Latham & Watkins LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.
    Case Number: 21-55-CFC

    Stockholders failed to adequately plead that securities filings were materially false or misleading where statements adequately conveyed that the company was subject to investigations and securities laws did not require corporations to guess as to the likely outcome of such investigations.

  • Murphy v. State

    Publication Date: 2024-04-01
    Practice Area: Civil Rights
    Industry: Hospitality and Lodging | Legal Services | State and Local Government
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 21-415-CFC

    Plaintiffs' disability discrimination claims failed due to the lack of allegations establishing a causal connection between one plaintiff's' disability and the family's eviction facilitated by state officials.

  • In Re Venoco, LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-12-25
    Practice Area: Bankruptcy
    Industry: Energy | State and Local Government
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert J. Dehney, Andrew R. Remming, Matthew O. Talmo, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Warren W. Harris, Nancy McEvily Davis, Stephani A. Michel, Bracewell LLP, Houston, TX for appellant.
    for defendant: Rob Bonta, Christina Bull Arndt, Office of the California Attorney General, Los Angeles, CA; Edward K. Black, Delaware Department of Justice, Wilmington, DE; David M. Fournier, Kenneth A. Listwak, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, Wilmington, DE; Steven S. Rosenthal, Marc S. Cohen, J.D. Taliaferro, Alicia M. Clough, Loeb & Loeb LLP, Los Angeles, CA for appellee.
    Case Number: 17-10828 (JTD)

    Adversary proceeding asserting inverse condemnation claim failed where state government seized possession of facility necessary to prevent dangerous environmental contamination when owner ran out of funds to operate the facility.

  • Backertop Licensing LLC v. Canary Connect, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-09-04
    Practice Area: Intellectual Property
    Industry: Software
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David L. Finger, Finger & Slanina, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jimmy C. Chong, Chong Law Firm, PA, Wilmington, DE; Ronald W. Burns, Frisco, Texas for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Alan Richard Silverstein, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark K. Suri, Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, Chicago, IL; Jeremy Douglas Anderson, Fish & Richardson, P.C., Wilmington, DE; Ricardo J. Bonilla, Fish & Richardson, P.C., Dallas, TX for defendants.
    Case Number: 22-572-CFC

    Court imposed a civil contempt sanction upon plaintiff's owner for her failure to appear for questioning by the court as ordered, as the court had the inherent authority to impose contempt to enforce its lawful orders.

  • Backertop Licensing LLC v. Canary Connect, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-07-24
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Consumer Products | Electronics
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Counsel: Jimmy C. Chong, Chong Law Firm, PA, Wilmington, DE; Ronald W. Bums, Frisco, Texas for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Alan Richard Silverstein, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark K. Suri, Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, Chicago, IL; Jeremy Douglas Anderson, Fish & Richardson, P.C., Wilmington, DE; Ricardo J. Bonilla, Fish & Richardson, P.C., Dallas, TX for defendants.
    Case Number: 22-572-CFC

    The court's inherent power to manage its docket and orderly and expeditiously dispose of cases extends to requiring nonparty out-of-state witnesses to personally appear before the court.

  • In re FTX Trading Ltd.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-13
    Practice Area: Bankruptcy
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking | E-Commerce | Federal Government
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ramona D. Elliot, P. Matthew Sutko, Frederick Gaston Hall, Sumi K. Sakata, Department of Justice, Executive Office for United States Trustees, Washington, DC; Andrew R. Vara, Joseph J. McMahon, Jr., Benjamin A. Hackman, Juliet M. Sarkessian, Department of Justice, Office of the United States Trustee, Wilmington, DE for appellant.
    for defendant: Adam G. Landis, Kimberly A. Brown, Matthew R. Pierce, Landis Rath & Cobb LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew G. Dietderich, James L. Bromley, Brian D. Glueckstein, Alexa J. Kranzley, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York, NY for appellees.
    Case Number: 22-11068 (JTD)

    District court was required to certify appeal of bankruptcy court order directly to the court of appeals where the order involved a purely question of law for which there was no controlling decision from the circuit court or Supreme Court.

  • Backertop Licensing LLP v. Canary Connect, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-05-16
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Consumer Products | Electronics
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jimmy C. Chong, Chong Law Firm, PA, Wilmington, DE; Ronald W. Bums, Fresh IP PLC, Frisco, TX for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Alan Richard Silverstein, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark K. Suri, Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, Chicago, IL; Jeremy Douglas Anderson, Fish & Richardson, P.C., Wilmington, DE; Ricardo J. Bonilla, Fish & Richardson, P.C., Dallas, TX for defendants.
    Case Number: 22-572-CFC

    Court had jurisdiction to issue memorandum despite plaintiff's motion to voluntarily dismiss, where the purpose of the memorandum was to obtain information for the court concerning whether plaintiff had been fraudulently established to shield real parties-in-interest from liability for bringing potentially frivolous litigation.

  • In re Seroquel XR Antitrust Litig.

    Publication Date: 2022-07-19
    Practice Area: Antitrust
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals | Retail | State and Local Government
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Carmella P. Keener, Cooch and Taylor, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Bruce E. Gerstein, Joseph Opper, Kimberly M. Hennings, Daniel Litvin, Garwin Gerstein & Fisher LLP, New York, NY; Peter R. Kohn, Joseph T. Lukens, Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, Philadelphia, PA; David F. Sorensen, Caitlin G. Coslett, Berger Montague PC, Philadelphia, PA; Stuart E. Des Roches, Amanda Hass, Chris Letter, Dan Chiorean, Thomas J. Maas, Odom & Des Roches, LLC, New Orleans, LA; Susan C. Segura, Erin R. Leger, David C. Raphael, Jr., Smith Segura Raphael & Leger, LLP, Alexandria, LA; Russell A. Chorush, Heim Payne & Cho Rush, LLP, Houston, TX; Michael J. Barry, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., Wilmington, DE; Robert G. Eisler, Deborah A. Elman, Chad B. Holtzman, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., New York, NY; Sharon K. Robertson, Donna M. Evans, Matthew W. Ruan, Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC, New York, NY; Michael J. Barry, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., Wilmington, DE; Jayne A. Goldstein, Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLP, Media, PA; J. Clayton Athey, Jason Wayne Rigby, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Barry L. Refsin, Alexander J. Egervary, Caitlin V. McHugh, Hangley Aronchick Segal Pudlin & Schiller, Philadelphia, PA; Monica L. Kiley, Eric L. Bloom, Hangley Aronchick Segal Pudlin & Schiller, Harrisburg, PA; J. Clayton Athey, Jason Wayne Rigby, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Scott E. Perwin, Lauren C. Ravkind, Anna T. Neil, Kenny Nachwalter, P.A., Miami, FL; Heidi M. Silton, Jessica N. Servais, Lockridge Grindal Nauen P.L.L.P., Minneapolis, MN; Peter Safirstein, Safirstein Metcalf LLP, New York, NY; Archana Tamoshunas, Taus, Cebulash & Landau, LLP, New York, NY; Lee Albert, Brian D. Brooks, Glancy, Prongay, & Myrray, New York, NY; Robert J. Kriner, Jr., Tiffany Joanne Cramer, Chimicles Schwartz Kriner & Donaldson-Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE; Dianne M. Nast, Joseph N. Roda, Michael D. Ford, NastLaw, Philadelphia, PA; Michael L. Roberts, Stephanie E. Smith, Roberts Law Firm US, PC, Little Rock, AR for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Daniel M. Silver, Alexandrea M. Joyce, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; John E. Schmidtlein, Benjamin M. Greenblum, Colette T. Connor, Thomas S. Fletcher, Akhil K. Gola, Williams & Connolly, Washington, DC; Arthur G. Connolly, III, Alan Richard Silverstein, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Wilmington, DE; Christopher J. Marino, James E. Gallagher, Davis Malm & D'Agostine, P.C., Boston, MA; Jack B. Blumenfeld, Michael J. Flynn, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Stephen J. McIntyre, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Brett J. Williamson, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Newport Beach, CA; Ben Bradshaw, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Washington, DC; John W. Shaw, Karen E. Keller, Nathan Roger Hoeschen, Shaw Keller LLP, Wilmington, DE; Thomas J. Lang, Christina E. Fahmy, Peter M. Boyle, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, Washington, DC for defendants.
    Case Number: D69888

    Antitrust claims arising from alleged reverse payment agreements were timely under the statute of limitations where each alleged supracompetitive sale constituted a discrete act that started the limitations period for that sale.

  • Astellas US LLC v. Hospira, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-05-31
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Douglas E. McCann, Gregory R. Booker, Robert M. Oakes, Nitika G. Fiorella, Kelly A. Del Dotto, Fish & Richardson P.C., Wilmington, DE; Elizabeth M. Flanagan, Michael J. Kane, Ryan V. Petty, Fish & Richardson P.C., Minneapolis, MN; W. Chad Shear, K. Nicole Williams, Fish & Richardson P.C., San Diego, CA; John M. Farrell, Fish & Richardson P.C., Redwood City, CA; Caitlin M. Dean, Fish & Richardson P.C., New York, NY; Laura E. Powell, Fish & Richardson P.C., Washington, DC; Jason Leonard, Vincent Li, McDermott Will & Emory, New York, NY; Lisa M. Ferri, Manuel J. Velez, Mayer Brown LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Dominick T. Gattuso, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Nathan R. Hoeschen, Shaw Keller LLP, Wilmington, DE; Charles B. Klein, Jovial Wong, Claire A. Fundakowski, Winston & Strawn LLP, Washington, DC; Alison M. King, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL for defendant.
    Case Number: D69833

    Patent infringement claims arising from manufacture of pharmaceutical generic product failed where abbreviated new drug application expressly excluded use of form of active ingredient that was protected by patent claims, and where plaintiffs failed to submit evidence showing that any amount of patent-protected claim would be generated by the manufacturing process.

  • Manhattan Telecomm. Corp. v. Granite Telecomm. LLC

    Publication Date: 2020-12-02
    Practice Area: Business Torts
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Steven L. Caponi, Matthew B. Goeller, K&L Gates LLP, Wilmington, DE; Dana B. Parker, Charles F. Rysavy, K&L Gates LLP, Newark, NJ for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Rudolph J. Scaggs, Jr, Zi-Xiang Shen, A. Gage Whirley, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; T. Christopher Donnelly, Joshua N. Ruby, Donnelly, Conroy & Gelhaar, LLP, Boston, MA for defendant.
    Case Number: D69210

    Although the complaint limited compensatory damages to an amount below the jurisdictional threshold, plaintiff sought injunctive and other potential relief which far exceeded that amount, so the federal district court declined to remand the case to state court.