Correspondent
White House correspondent, covers patent, trade and regulatory news
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed a district court dismissal of a complaint for failing to meet pleading standards. The court held that the appellant failed to provide a short and plain statement of the claim required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure eight comma a.
The D.C. Circuit dismissed a petition for a writ of mandamus, holding that the All Writs Act does not grant jurisdiction to intervene in a closed case where the appellate court lacks authority to review the underlying state court decisions. The court further affirmed the district court's denial of leave to file new documents, ruling that the lower court did not abuse its discretion in managing its docket.
The Third Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Elmagin's post-trial motions, upholding a jury verdict that found trade secrets existed but were not misappropriated. The court also confirmed that attorneys' fees claims in trade secret cases are matters for the judge, not a jury.
The Third Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of post-trial motions in a trade secret dispute, upholding a jury verdict that found the strategies were trade secrets but not misappropriated. The court also rejected a request for a jury trial on the issue of attorney's fees, ruling that such determinations are matters of law for the judge.
The Third Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Elmagin's motions for judgment as a matter of law and a new trial in a trade secret dispute. The appellate court held that the jury's verdict, which found the strategies were trade secrets but not misappropriated, was supported by sufficient evidence.
The Third Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Elmagin's motions for judgment as a matter of law and a new trial regarding trade secret misappropriation claims. The court held that the jury's verdict, which found trade secrets existed but were not misappropriated, was supported by sufficient evidence.
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dismissed an appeal challenging a district court order remanding a landlord-tenant case to state court. The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate appellate jurisdiction over the remand order.
The D.C. Circuit denied a petition for review of an NTSB order affirming a pilot's violation of federal aviation regulations for flying below minimum safe altitudes. The court rejected the pilot's arguments regarding alleged ALJ errors, insufficient notice in the complaint, and a request to overrule prior precedent on sanction deference.
The Ninth Circuit enforced the National Labor Relations Board's amended order finding that Valley Hospital committed an unfair labor practice by unilaterally ceasing union dues checkoff after a collective bargaining agreement expired. The court held that the Board was not bound by its prior decision and could change its interpretation of the National Labor Relations Act provided it offered a reasoned explanation for the shift.
The Second Circuit affirmed a district court judgment holding that Conagen was not liable for breach of contract after negotiations for an exclusivity arrangement failed. The court ruled that the executed Term Sheet created a binding duty to negotiate in good faith but did not bind the parties to the specific exclusivity terms sought by Givaudan.
