Claim Preclusion

News & Analysis as of

Client Alert: Premises Liability Claim Brought by Correctional Officer Not Precluded by Workers’ Compensation Law

In Wright v. State of California (No. A139034, filed 1/30/2015) the First District Court of Appeal held a state correctional officer, who lived on state owned property adjacent to his place of employment, was not precluded,...more

Anti-Sequential Causation Clause Upheld in Hurricane Irene Case in New Jersey

In Ashrit Realty, LLC v. Tower National Ins. Co., 2015 WL 248490, 2015 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 107 (N.J.Super.Ct., App.Div., Jan. 20,  2015), New Jersey’s Appellate Division held that an anti-concurrent/anti-sequential...more

Indemnification by Insurance Precluded under Wyoming Anti-indemnity Statute in Oil & Gas Personal Injury Coverage Dispute

On December 19, 2014, the Federal District Court in Wyoming issued a decision in Lexington Insurance Company v. Precision Drilling Co., LP, et al. , D. Wyo., Case No. 12-cv-070-J, extending the reach of the anti-indemnity...more

Trademark Review - December 2014

The TTAB Sets the Rules for Pleading Abandonment of a Section 66(a) Registration - VENM seeks registration of the mark VENM for dance costumes. Dragon Bleu opposed registration of VENM’s mark based on 3 earlier...more

9th Circuit Upholds Issue Preclusion In Subsequent Derivative Suit

Derivative suits rarely arrive alone. When something goes awry, directors and officers can be expected to see multiple suits based on demand futility as well as wrongful demand refusal. Often, suits will be filed at...more

Intellectual Property Alert: Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc.

On December 2, 2014, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc., the first trademark case to reach the Court in nearly ten years. William F. Jay, of...more

U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument Over the Preclusive Effect of Administrative Trademark Determinations on Future...

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument last week in a much anticipated trademark matter, B&B Hardware Inc. v. Hargis Industries Inc. et al. The primary question presented was whether a likelihood-of-confusion...more

Channeling Justice Ginsburg of U.S. Supreme Court on the Right to Register a Trademark

We sounded the alarm exactly six months ago about a trademark case of great importance to brand owners: B&B Hardware v. Hargis Industries. Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case, and here is...more

Trademark Cases Pending Before the U.S. Supreme Court

In December, the Supreme Court of the United States will hear oral arguments on two trademark cases: B&B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc. and Hana Financial v. Hana Bank. These cases address the issues of whether a...more

Supreme Court Told That TTAB Preclusion Raises Constitutional Concerns

As reported in our September 23 Client Alert, the Supreme Court is set to hear argument on December 2 on the issue of whether likelihood of confusion findings by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) are entitled to...more

Bankruptcy Bleak House—The Limited Ability of Bankruptcy Courts to Enter Final Judgments

In Stern V. Marshall, ____ U.S ___, 131 S. Ct. 2594 (2011), the Supreme Court held that bankruptcy courts cannot issue final judgments on state law counterclaims even though they are “core proceeding”. Stern V. Marshall is...more

Supreme Court To Decide Preclusive Effect of TTAB Decisions on Subsequent Court Actions

Last week the Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether decisions of the Trademark Trial and Appeals Board (TTAB) concerning likelihood of confusion preclude relitigating that issue in subsequent infringement...more

UPDATE: U.S. Supreme Court Will Decide What Preclusive Effect, If Any, Should Be Given to Likelihood of Confusion Findings by the...

As we reported in our May 29 client alert, the Solicitor General submitted an amicus brief recommending that the Supreme Court grant a petition for certiorari seeking a determination of whether likelihood of confusion...more

Claim Preclusion Bars Second Lawsuit on Reexamined Claims Previously Held Invalid

Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. Apotex Inc. - Addressing whether claim preclusion bars a second suit asserting reexamined claims against a defendant who was victorious on the merits on the original claims in a first...more

Preclusive Effect Of Prior Arbitration Is An Arbitrable Issue

The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts recently applied the First Circuit’s analysis in Employers Insurance Co. of Wausau v. OneBeacon American Insurance Co., Case No. 13-1913 (1st Cir. Feb. 26, 2014), when...more

GENERICally Speaking - Vol. 4, No. 1

The Hatch-Waxman Litigation and Life Sciences practice groups at Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. are pleased to offer the latest edition of their quarterly publication regarding ANDA patent litigation issues and the...more

Supreme Court Rules that the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act Does Not Preempt State Law Claims

This week, the US Supreme Court narrowed the scope of the preemption provisions of the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA), which bars certain state law-based securities class actions. As a result, securities...more

Inside The Courts - March 2014 | Volume 6 | Issue 1

In This Issue: - U.S. SUPREME COURT: ..Lawson v. FMR LLC, No. 12-3 (U.S. March 4, 2014) ..Chadbourne & Parke LLP v. Troice, No. 12-79 (U.S. Feb. 26, 2014) - CLASS CERTIFICATION: ..In re BP...more

The Supreme Court Narrows SLUSA’s Reach and Expands the Pool of Potential Defendants Subject to State Securities Law Class Actions

On February 26, 2014, the United States Supreme Court limited the reach of the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (SLUSA), thereby increasing the number of individuals and entities that may be surprised to...more

High Court Limits Application of Phrase “In Connection With” for Federal Securities Laws

On February 26, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Chadbourne & Parke LLP v. Troice et al. that the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (“SLUSA”) does not preclude class action lawsuits asserting state law...more

SCOTUS Holds State-Law Securities Class Actions Not Precluded By Federal Law

On February 26, the Supreme Court held that the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (Securities Litigation Act) does not preclude four state-law based class actions against firms and individuals who allegedly...more

Petition for Certiorari Filed Regarding Preclusive Effect of Likelihood of Confusion Findings by the Trademark Trial and Appeal...

In advising clients and making strategic decisions about whether to bring or defend inter partes proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ("TTAB"), trademark practitioners need to consider carefully whether...more

Even If It Does Not Say So, an Arbitration Agreement May Preclude Class Actions

Nearly two years ago, in the now infamous D.R. Horton decision, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that it constitutes an unfair labor practice for an employer to require, as a condition of employment, that employees...more

Failure to Complain May Preclude Relief

A judge in the Northern District of Illinois recently held that an employee’s failure to complain internally may preclude an employee from maintaining a suit for harassment under Title VII. In Zuidema v. Raymond Christopher,...more

California Appellate Court Reaffirms the Trade Secret Displacement (Preemption) Doctrine

Courts continue to define the scope of the emerging trade secret displacement doctrine, (commonly referred to as preemption) which stems from California's Uniform Trade Secrets Act ("UTSA"). The UTSA contains a relatively...more

36 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2