The courts’ output has slowed as the days grow ever shorter ahead of the winter solstice. Welcome to the Commercial Roundup of December 11, 2024.
- “You’d think [the new Texas Business Court] would want to resolve this [dispute over its jurisdiction to handle old District Court cases] quickly because the whole idea is you don’t get bogged down in procedure.”
- PTAB’s view of “merchant” as provider of goods or services didn’t preclude court from giving it a narrower meaning.
- Taking online orders for goods from outside U.S. and later dropping then gave U.S. court personal jurisdiction over merchant.
- Meaning of patent claim term could vary across claims.
- Sua sponte ruling that patent failed Section 101 test for patent-eligible subject matter abused trial court’s discretion.
- “It’s the fashion world. Here today, gone tomorrow.”
- Antitrust enforcers “are not going to come up with a way for [a competition-reducing merger] to work for you.” Now, “companies thinking about merging think twice about it.”
- “The companies are saying that this merger won’t reduce competition because Kors is so weak,” Barry Barnett, a partner in the law firm Susman Godfrey, said. “Tapestry has to revive it before it can raise prices.”
- Contract limit on damages for breach did not make harm from breach “irreparable”.
- Proof that device maker failed to seek “third-party” advice on whether device infringed patent ran afoul of 35 U.S.C. 298’s bar against using failure to request legal advice to show willfulness.
- Untrue statement that Crocs used “patented” stuff to make shoes could support false ad claim under Lanham Act.
- License didn’t foreclose patent claims. Plus, de novo standard applies to review of whether complaint alleges “facts” or “conclusions”.
- Using someone else’s trademark to place ads ahead of link to trademark owner’s website doesn’t infringe trademarks without proof that user’s conduct misled buyers.
- Contract that assigned question of disputes’ arbitrability to arbitrator left now room for discovery in district court.
- Purchase option giving seller right to pick firm to set option price from lists of two banks that merged into other banks required seller to seek buyer’s okay of price setter.
- Lack of data showing link between substances in oil spill and workers’ ailments barred expert’s report that spill harmed workers’ health.
- Fact question over what patent claims meant barred dismissal.
- Using trademark to trigger online ads didn’t infringe it.
- Promise not to sue seller of infringing product barred claim against its buyers.
- “Group” might mean “one or more”.
- Mass/class arbitration rules made process too strange and winning too hard for consumers.
- Parties can’t remove pre-9/1/24 cases to the new Texas business court.
- Bank’s error in paying check’s entire amount to one of two joint payees discharged maker.
- Reports of earnings on warranty contracts may have implied falsely that seller’s method for counting income on contracts relied on real payment history, barring toss of securities claims against seller, its auditor, and stock underwriters.
- Breach of duty to DISCUSS license for standard-essential patents could preclude enforcement of non-U.S. orders banning sale of products practicing SEP inventions.
- VoIP patent required two-way voice.
- Lack of clear ruling on scope of discovery under subpoena in aid of action outside U.S. under 28 U.S.C. 1782 barred appeal.
- Statement on CNN that Twitter suspended a member for posting “misinformation” instead of “private information” met falsity element of member’s libel claim.
- City of Baltimore wins $274 million opioids verdict against McKesson and AmerisourceBergen.
