Tags » Collateral Estoppel

Phil-Insul Corp., DBA IntegraSpec v. Airlite Plastics Co., Formtech, LLC


Docket No. 2015-2037

O’MALLEY, BRYSON, WALLACH
April 14, 2017

Brief Summary: DC decision of collateral estoppel (CE) affirmed. Rule 36 judgment can serve as a basis for CE decisions. 615 more words

Collateral Estoppel

National Labor Relations Board v. Calvert

(S.D. Ind. Mar. 31, 2017)

The district court affirms the bankruptcy court’s ruling in favor of the debtor in the nondischargeability action. The NLRB argued its claim against the debtor should be denied under 11 U.S.C. 70 more words

District Court For Southern District Of Indiana

Intellectual Ventures I LLC, et al. v. Capital One Financial Company et al.


Docket No. 2016-1077

PROST, WALLACH, CHEN
March 7, 2017

Brief Summary: DC grant of SJ for collateral estoppel (issue preclusion) affirmed under Fourth Circuit law and finding of ineligibility under under § 101 affirmed under the two-step Alice/Mayo “abstract idea” / “inventive concept” test. 492 more words

Patentability

Allergan, Inc. and Duke University v. Sandoz, Inc. (Akorn, Hi-Tech Pharm., Apotex)


Docket No. 2016-1085, -1160

REYNA, WALLACH, CHEN
March 17, 2017

Non-precedential

Brief Summary: DC finding of collateral estoppel and obviousness for asserted claims affirmed but reversed as to the unasserted claims of the Allergan’s ‘953 patent (“Sandoz, Inc. 657 more words

Obviousness

Hunt v. Spencer (In re Spencer)

(Bankr. S.D. Ind. Feb. 24, 2017)

The bankruptcy court denies the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in this nondischargeability action under 11 U.S.C. §§ 523(a)(2), (4), and (6). 70 more words

Bankruptcy Court For Southern District Of Indiana

Panther Petroleum, LLC v. Couch (In re Couch)

(6th Cir. B.A.P. Feb. 2, 2017)

The Sixth Circuit B.A.P. affirms the bankruptcy court’s judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in the nondischargeability action. Collateral estoppel prevented the debtor from defending against the claim that the debt arose from fraud and a willful and malicious injury. 69 more words

Nondischargeability

Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Ltd. et al. (Petitioner) v. Monosol Rx, LLC (Patent Owner)

IPR2016-01111 (U.S. Pat. No. 8,603,514 B2)
Decision Denying Institution of IPR
December 5, 2016

Brief Summary: IPR petition denied because Dr. Reddy’s did not show obviousness by a preponderance of the evidence; no collateral estoppel since issues in two cases were not identical. 454 more words

Obviousness