Law360 - The Newswire for Business Lawyers
Sign In
 

Try our Advanced Search for more refined results

Law360
  • Search Law360
  • Search News Only
  • Search Cases Only
  • Search PTAB Only
  • Search TTAB Only
  • Advanced Search
  Sign In

Law360

|

The Practice of Law

Access to Justice Aerospace & Defense Appellate Asset Management Banking Bankruptcy Benefits California Cannabis Capital Markets Class Action Colorado Commercial Contracts Competition Compliance Connecticut Construction Consumer Protection Corporate Criminal Practice Cybersecurity & Privacy Delaware Employment
Energy Environmental Fintech Florida Food & Beverage Georgia Government Contracts Health Hospitality Illinois Immigration Insurance Intellectual Property International Arbitration International Trade Legal Ethics Legal Industry Life Sciences Massachusetts Media & Entertainment Mergers & Acquisitions Michigan Native American
New Jersey New York North Carolina Ohio Pennsylvania Personal Injury & Medical Malpractice Private Equity Product Liability Project Finance Public Policy Real Estate Retail & E-Commerce Securities Sports & Betting Tax Technology Telecommunications Texas Transportation Trials Washington White Collar

Law360 Pulse

|

Business of Law

California Pulse Connecticut Pulse Courts DC Pulse Daily Litigation Delaware Pulse
Florida Pulse Georgia Pulse In-House Insights Legal Tech & AI Mid-Law
Modern Lawyer New Jersey Pulse New York Pulse Pennsylvania Pulse Small Law Texas Pulse

Law360 Authority

|

Deep News & Analysis

Tax Authority

Federal International State & Local

Employment Authority

Discrimination Labor Other Wage & Hour

Insurance Authority

General Liability Other Property Specialty Lines

Real Estate Authority

Commercial Other Residential

Bankruptcy Authority

Large Cap Mid Cap

Healthcare Authority

Deals & Corporate Governance Digital Health & Technology Other Policy & Compliance

Global

Law360 UK

Commercial Litigation UK Corporate Crime & Compliance UK Employment UK Financial Services UK Insurance UK Intellectual Property UK Pulse UK Transactions UK
Close
  • Law360
  • Law360 UK
  • Law360 Pulse
  • Law360 Employment Authority
  • Law360 Tax Authority
  • Law360 Insurance Authority
  • Law360 Real Estate Authority
  • Law360 Healthcare Authority
  • Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
  • Products
  • Lexis®
  • Law360 Tax Authority
  • Law360 In-Depth
  • Law360 Podcasts
  • Rankings
  • Leaderboard Analytics
  • Regional Powerhouses
  • Law360's MVPs
  • Women in Law Report
  • Law360 400
  • Diversity Snapshot
  • Practice Groups of the Year
  • Rising Stars
  • Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
  • Sections
  • Adv. Search & Platform Tools
  • About all sections
  • Browse all sections
  • Banking
  • Bankruptcy
  • Class Action
  • Competition
  • Employment
  • Energy
  • Expert Analysis
  • Insurance
  • Intellectual Property
  • Product Liability
  • Securities
  • Beta Tools
  • Track docs
  • Track attorneys
  • Track judges
  • Site Menu
  • Join the Law360 team
  • Search legal jobs
  • Learn more about Law360
  • Read testimonials
  • Contact Law360
  • Sign up for our newsletters
  • Law360 Company
  • About Law360 Authority
  • Resource Library
  • Site Map
  • Help
CaseMap® CLE On-Demand Context CourtLink® Digital Library Intelligize Law360 Lex Machina Lexis Medical Navigator™ Lexis® Lexis+™
Lexis® Tax MLex® Nexis® Nexis Diligence™ Nexis Newsdesk™ Practical Guidance Product Liability Navigator Securities Mosaic® State Net® Verdict & Settlement Analyzer
Intellectual Property Securities Bankruptcy Competition Employment White Collar Legal Industry Access To Justice Law360 UK Pulse || See all sections ||
 
 
 
How has AI changed the way you work?
Click here to take the Law360 survey

You have filtered by:

xDate Filed: In the last 30 days

Search within the list below:

Name Count

Please assign a name to this alert

All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes

Case Activity (670247)

  1. Motion | Filed: January 14, 2026 | Entered: January 14, 2026 Wang et al v. Kaiser et al

    Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee | Hawaii

    Pro Hac Vice

    MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Sandy K. Hom Filing fee $ 300, receipt number AHIDC-3254273.Carmen Theresa DiAmore-Siah appearing for Petitioners Baifeng Wang, Bailin Wang, Baishen Wang, Jianqiang Wang, Meikun Zheng (DiAmore-Siah, Carmen)

  2. Minutes | Filed: January 14, 2026 | Entered: January 14, 2026 Barclay v. The Gordian Group, Inc., et al.

    Civil Rights: Jobs | Hawaii

    Link

    On September 12, 2025, Plaintiff David Barclay filed a Complaint in the Circuit Court of the Third Circuit, State of Hawaii against Defendant The Gordian Group, Inc. and Defendant Fortive Corporation. (ECF No. 1-2). The Complaint was subject to the "notice pleading" standard at the time it was filed in Hawaii State Court. See Schnute v. PNC Bank, N.A., 2019 WL 3208645, *4 (D. Haw. July 16, 2019) (explaining that "a more related 'notice' pleading standard applies in [Hawaii] state courts" and that the Hawaii Supreme Court has expressly rejected the federal plausibility pleading, citing Bank of Am., N.A. v. Reyes-Toledo, 428 P.3d 761, 764 (Haw. 2018)).

    On October 16, 2025, Defendant The Gordian Group, Inc. removed the Complaint to the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii. (ECF No. 1). The Complaint is now subject to the federal pleading standard which requires a plaintiff to state sufficient facts to plausibly state a claim pursuant to Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) and Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 556 (2007). See Moises v. Par Pacific Holdings, Inc., 2022 WL 263576, *2-*3 (D. Haw. Jan. 28, 2022).

    On January 13, 2026, Defendant Fortive Corporation filed:

    DEFENDANT FORTIVE CORPORATION'S MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT (ECF No. 11).

    The Motion to Dismiss relies on the federal plausibility pleading standard set forth in Iqbal and Twombly.

    The Parties are ORDERED to meet and confer as to whether:

    (1)Plaintiff wishes to file an Opposition to Defendant Fortive Corporation's Motion to Dismiss Complaint,

    or in the alternative,

    (2)Plaintiff instead elects to file a First Amended Complaint which would render moot Defendant Fortive Corporation's Motion to Dismiss Complaint.

    The Parties shall file a Notice as to their positions following their meet and confer on or before Wednesday, February 18, 2026.

    (SENIOR JUDGE HELEN GILLMOR)(tl)

  3. 670245 additional result(s)

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Archive of over 450,000 articles
  • Database of over 2.1 million cases
  • Full-text search of patent complaints
  • Full-text search of PTAB cases and documents
  • Database of TTAB cases and documents, including full-text search of documents
  • Customized email alerts and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

View full search results

Already a subscriber? Click here to login

Already have access? Click here to login

Get instant access to the one-stop news source for business lawyers

Register Now!

Sign up now for free access to this content

PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.

Law360 may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.

You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.

We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.

Register

Already have access?

  1. Forgot your password?
  2. Sign In
RELX Group Lexis Nexis

© 2026, Portfolio Media, Inc. | About | Contact Us | Careers at Law360 | Terms | Privacy Policy | Trust Center | Cookie Settings | Processing Notice | Ad Choices | Help | Site Map | Resource Library | Law360 Company | Testimonials