Quantcast
Home (page 92)

Tag Archives: U.S. District Court – Eastern District

No Stay in Fraud-Detection Software Case (access required)

In plaintiff software developer’s suit alleging defendant title company has infringed plaintiff’s patented real estate settlement fraud prevention software system, a Norfolk U.S. District Court denies a motion to stay this suit pending a decision by the Patent Trial and ...

Read More »

‘Excusable Neglect’ Found for Filing Delay (access required)

A defendant’s one-day delay – due to the weather, a national holiday and forgetfulness – in filing reply briefs to accompany their motions to dismiss and/or transfer plaintiffs’ business tort suit is deemed “excusable neglect,” and the Richmond U.S. District ...

Read More »

Defendant Wins Fees for ‘Frivolous’ Claim (access required)

In plaintiff home designer/builder’s suit against a couple who allegedly built a home that infringed on plaintiff’s copyright to a “Bainbridge” home design, a Norfolk U.S. District Court denies an award of attorney’s fees for copyright infringement, but awards $13,760 ...

Read More »

Weak Virginia Sales Cited in Venue Transfer (access required)

In plaintiff Taiwanese corporation’s patent infringement suit against a defendant whose production activities occurred in Austin, Texas, the Richmond U.S. District Court grants defendant’s motion to transfer venue to the Northern District of California; defendant’s sales activity in Virginia has ...

Read More »

Foil Wrap Uses ‘Tacking’ for Packaging Claim (access required)

In this suit alleging defendant Handi-Foil has infringed registered trademarks for Reynolds’ Wrap and engaged in false advertising, an Alexandria U.S. District Court grants summary judgment to plaintiff Reynolds Consumer Products Inc. on its “tacking” defense to Handi-Foil’s claim that ...

Read More »

Restaurant Owes Damages for Fight Broadcast (access required)

A Richmond U.S. District Court enters a default judgment and awards plaintiff, a sports event production company, damages of $22,321.68 for defendant restaurant’s willful interception and unauthorized broadcast transmission of a boxing match on Sept. 17, 2011, for commercial purposes, ...

Read More »