A California federal judge on Monday tossed a whistleblower’s False Claims Act allegations against Merck and Co. Inc. of off-label promotion of Integrilin and kickbacks, ruling they were substantially similar to claims against Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc. that he had previously dismissed.
Google Inc. and its Waze Inc. unit copied information from a competitor’s database and used it to alert users of its navigation apps of traffic hazards and speed traps, according to a copyright infringement suit filed Tuesday.
A California federal judge on Monday tossed a putative class action against Hyundai Motor America, holding car owners cannot allege they overpaid for vehicles based on hardware for its Blue Link subscription-based emergency assistance and maintenance alert system as they bargained away such claims by agreeing to a free trial.
Floyd Mayweather's manager along with investment firm Waddell & Reed Financial Inc. asked a California federal court Monday to toss a $100 million lawsuit brought by Manny Pacquiao’s promoter over an alleged monopolization plan, saying the suit is merely a desperate attempt to prevent inevitable changes in boxing.
NBCUniversal Media LLC on Monday fought to keep in California federal court a $10 million suit brought by figure skater Oksana Baiul seeking unpaid royalties for her performance in the 1994 television special “Nutcracker on Ice,” insisting that diversity jurisdiction is appropriate.
Uber Technologies Inc. drivers scored a major victory against the ride-hailing company Tuesday when a California federal judge agreed to certify a class of Golden State drivers who claim they were mislabeled as independent contractors and cheated out of tips.
A California federal judge on Tuesday refused to order the Center for Medical Progress to take down a secretly filmed video in which Planned Parenthood executive Deborah Nucatola allegedly negotiates the sale of fetal tissue, saying he doesn't see how removing the video would protect her.
A federal prosecutor faced a tough crowd during oral arguments in a Ninth Circuit appeal challenging the convictions of three men for defrauding the Crow Tribe through a double-billing scheme, with two of the three justices questioning whether the government's case had been strong enough.
Two Fenwick & West LLP intellectual property attorneys have left and joined a former colleague from the firm to create a technology litigation boutique, Tyz Marton Schumann LLP, the new entity announced on Monday.
USA Water Polo Inc. urged a California federal judge Monday to toss a proposed class action over water polo concussions, arguing that an injured athlete’s mother has failed to show that the organization must implement head safety rules that would “drastically change” the sport.
The company behind the Corner Bakery Cafe franchise violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by installing the transaction counters in a restaurant too high for a wheelchair user to access, even though it also provided customers a lower surface, a California federal judge ruled Monday.
The Ninth Circuit recently found that a Clean Water Act permit wasn’t required to transfer water from the Lower Klamath Lake to the Klamath River but avoided the thornier issue of the validity of the EPA’s water transfer rule, leaving experts to watch how the Second Circuit handles a case over the rule.
A California federal judge on Monday ruled that the alleged “near catatonic” state of Clear-View Technologies Inc.’s second-chair counsel during trial isn’t grounds to set aside a jury verdict letting M&R Solutions LLC off the hook for allegedly stealing Clear-View’s intellectual property.
A former special agent with the U.S. Secret Service admitted Monday in California federal court to using his position as an investigator to steal hundreds of thousands of dollars of bitcoin from illicit accounts on the Silk Road website.
A California federal judge on Friday dismissed a whistleblower’s False Claims Act suit accusing Scan Health Plan of overcharging Medicare and Medi-Cal after finding the complaint mirrored that of a state audit report.
A woman suing the University of California Los Angeles Health System for allowing her ex-boyfriend's new partner to access her medical records rested her case on Monday, after calling a psychologist to testify that she will need months of costly treatment for depression caused by the incident.
A former worker accusing Kohl's Department Stores of using ambiguous and misleading language to obtain credit reports in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act told a California federal judge Friday that the retailer’s bid to dismiss the proposed class action rests on a faulty interpretation of the law.
Bank of America Corp. has won final approval of a $9 million settlement with part-time employees and a $3.6 million deal in another class action over pay stubs, despite the objections of a nonclass member who injected himself into both cases, prompting the bank to call him “vexatious.”
Actress Elizabeth Banks and others behind the 2014 movie "Walk of Shame" are demanding attorneys' fees after defeating a "baseless" copyright infringement suit that they say was nothing more than "a bad faith effort to extort settlement money."
Two creators of the Walt Disney Co.’s hit kid's television show “Hannah Montana” lost their bid for a cut of the show’s merchandising profits when a California judge refused Monday to vacate an arbitration ruling upholding Disney's interpretation of their profit-sharing deal.
While anti-concurrent cause provisions are enforceable in a vast number of policies and jurisdictions, the Ninth Circuit's Stankova decision has brought the enforceability of such clauses into question for fire losses in Arizona and in states that have adopted the New York standard fire insurance policy, say William Webster and Charles Cannizzaro at Robins Kaplan LLP.
Commentators have overlooked the larger implication of the recent Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola Inc. opinion — the Ninth Circuit has managed to create a circuit split with the far more experienced Federal Circuit concerning the principles for determining a reasonable and nondiscriminatory royalty articulated last year in Ericsson Inc. v. D‑Link Systems Inc., says Gregory Sidak, chairman of Criterion Economics LLC.
As the Tenth Circuit recently recognized, false advertising causes of action are providing a robust weapon against overly aggressive and often youthful firms who “cross the line from harmless hyperbole into underhanded deception with material commercial consequences.” However, the current landscape is not a complete boon for competitor plaintiffs, says Eric Buetzow of Zelle Hofmann Voelbel & Mason LLP.
The National Labor Relations Board's "refined" test determining joint-employer status is a major victory for unions at the bargaining table. Under the new standard, an employer could be deemed a joint employer by merely possessing the latent power to control any terms and conditions of employment, regardless of whether it ever exercises such power, say Daniel Johns and Rogers Stevens of Ballard Spahr LLP.
In arguing in favor of the patentee obtaining as reasonable royalty damages the entire incremental profit earned by the alleged infringer on the smallest salable patent practicing unit, a recent Law360 guest article makes several arguments that are either incorrect or irrelevant, say William Rooklidge and Andrew Brown of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP.
Modern business is borderless and it is inevitable that clients will get sued in jurisdictions other than their “home” state, often where their in-house counsel or primary law firm is ill-equipped to handle the litigation without assistance. With an eye on avoiding ethical dilemmas, Cole Schotz PC attorneys Christopher Massaro and Neoma Ayala discuss the relevant rules and procedures unique to New Jersey.
The 2007 U.S. Supreme Court case Leegin Creative Leather Products Inc. v. PSKS Inc. was supposed to unloose vertical price restraints by allowing resale price maintenance agreements, but the anticipated uptick of RPMs in franchise and distribution agreements never actually happened, due to various misconceptions surrounding the decision, says Leonard Budow at Fox Rothschild LLP.
The California Supreme Court has unanimously reversed course from 50 years of precedent — confirming that wills in the state should be treated no differently than other written documents when it comes to correcting mistakes. The ruling almost certainly will create more litigation, say Ryan Cunningham and Allonn Levy of Hopkins & Carley.
Vincente Garcia, former head of Latin American sales for SAP International Inc., recently pled guilty in San Francisco federal court to violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and settled civil FCPA charges brought by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, underscoring the agencies' continuing focus on the technology sector and Northern California in general, say attorneys with Morrison & Foerster LLP.
Last week, in its long-anticipated and unanimous decision in Fluor Corp. v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court made it significantly easier to transfer insurance rights in corporate acquisitions and reorganizations, placing California squarely in the mainstream view, say Richard DeNatale and Celia Jackson at Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP.