Quantcast
Home (page 9)

Tag Archives: Judge T.S. Ellis III

No ‘Do-Over’ Claim Construction in GPS Patent Case (access required)

In plaintiff TomTom Inc.’s suit for a declaration that defendant AOT Systems’ ‘836 patent for tracking data in a mobile Global Positioning System is invalid and therefore not infringed by plaintiff, the Alexandria U.S. District Court declines to reconsider its ...

Read More »

No Reconsideration for ‘Quibbles,’ ‘Rehashing’ (access required)

In plaintiff Projects Management Company’s contract action claiming defendant DynCorp International breached a subcontract, Subcontract 002, by paying invoices for over $1.2 million to a bank account in Lebanon not specifically authorized in Subcontract 002, an Alexandria U.S. District Court ...

Read More »

Contractor’s Damages Claim Dismissed (access required)

In plaintiff Projects Management Company’s contract action claiming defendant DynCorp International breached a subcontract, Subcontract 002, by paying invoices for over $1.2 million to a bank account in Lebanon not specifically authorized in Subcontract 002, an Alexandria U.S. District Court ...

Read More »

‘Markman’ Construction Issued for GPS Patent (access required)

In plaintiff TomTom Inc.’s suit for a declaration that defendant AOT Systems’ ‘836 patent for tracking data in a mobile Global Positioning System is invalid and therefore not infringed by plaintiff, the Alexandria U.S. District Court issues its decision after ...

Read More »

No Mandamus for Adjustment Adjudication (access required)

The Alexandria U.S. District Court dismisses a Salvadoran citizen’s petition for a writ of mandamus ordering the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to adjudicate petitioner’s adjustment application; the petition is moot because USCIS already has administratively closed and dismissed his ...

Read More »

Loan Guarantee Denial Triggers ECOA Notice (access required)

A mortgage lender’s failure to secure a federal loan guarantee under the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s guaranteed Rural Development program, as allegedly represented to the borrower, was an “adverse action” that required notification under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and ...

Read More »