Sentences with phrase «district court awards»

Following a jury verdict awarding plaintiff $ 919.9 million in compensatory damages for defendant's willful and malicious misappropriation of 149 trade secrets, the Richmond U.S. District Court awards plaintiff $ 350,000 in punitive damages: Virginia's Uniform Trade Secrets Act caps punitive damages...

In January 2004, the Tokyo District Court awarded him $ 190 million (Science, 6 February 2004, p. 744).

The Virginia district court awarded the PTO only expert fees.

Successfully defended leading heavy equipment producer in a patent infringement case relating to hydraulic control systems in which district court awarded our client attorneys» fees and Federal Circuit affirmed.

Not exact matches

But without a majority decision on Halo, it could be more difficult for district courts to award attorneys» fees to prevailing parties in patent troll cases, which every year sap billions of dollars in such fees.

Conoco filed suit on Thursday in the U.S. District court in Manhattan seeking to enforce the award, saying the court had jurisdiction because the ICC arbitration was held in New York and PDVSA had not responded to a demand for payment.

USA Today: Ruling lets S.C. students earn credit for religion classes In a ruling that advocates called «a tremendous victory for religious education,» a three - judge panel of the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the right of a school district to award high school credit for religious courses, as long as they meet secular standards.

Davis Family Vineyards Files Trademark Infringement Lawsuit: Today, the award - winning and family operated, Healdsburg - based Davis Family Vineyards filed a lawsuit for trademark infringement and unfair and deceptive trade practices against Napa Valley newcomer Davis Estates LLC and others in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California...

As previously disclosed, the Company received a final judgment in its favor for a total of US$ 1.9 million plus interest from the US District Court for the District of Arizona in January, 2016 related to an arbitral award of R$ 7.8 million, including interest and penalties, from a Brazilian arbitration panel.

RiceBran Technologies Awarded Final Judgment of $ 1.9 Million Plus Interest from US District Court Related to 2008 Purchase of Irgovel

The current $ 1.3 million reparation award is related to amounts still owed to related companies Silver K Farms, Kirk Jacobs Farms and Reynolds Bros., according to records of a three - day bench trial in U.S. District Court in Idaho in November 2016.

On remand, the District Court and Second Circuit rejected the counties» affirmative defenses and awarded money damages.

Nassau County appealed, and in 2014, a U.S. District Court jury awarded Restivo and Halstead a combined $ 36 million in damages.

Washington — Parents who win special - education disputes with school districts can not be awarded attorneys» fees if their cases do not go to court, a federal appellate court has ruled.

On February 14, 2005, State Supreme Court Justice Leland DeGrasse, who had overseen the case from the beginning, awarded the city a staggering $ 5.6 billion more per year for its schools, a 43 percent increase to the city's $ 12.9 billion school budget, an amount that would raise per - pupil spending to more than $ 18,000 per year and make New York City's huge school district (with more than a third of the children in the state) among the richest in the state, if not the country.

Resurrecting long - ignored school desegregation lawsuits of the 1970s, the DOJ petitioned a federal district court to permanently enjoin Louisiana from awarding any vouchers to students in districts operating under federal desegregation orders until the state had received authorization from a federal court.

The Minnesota Supreme Court has upheld an $ 820,000 compensatory - damages award won by the North St. Paul - Maplewood school district from the producer of an asbestos fireproofing spray used in a high school built in 1969.

However, the court last month overturned $ 4.2 million in punitive damages awarded in 1990 by a state court jury in Independent School District No. 622 v. Keene Corporation.

On December 29, 2015, the U.S. District Court in Oregon awarded a landmark settlement that will impact almost 8,000 workers with intellectual and developmental disabilities in the state.

Subsequently, the court upheld the district's verdict and awarded $ 175,210 (in response to the requested amount of $ 245,340) in attorney's fees, $ 12,474 in expert witness fees and court costs, $ 108,495 in front pay and retirement benefits, and postjudgment interest.

Appeal from judgment entered by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Mark D. Fox, Magistrate Judge), which held that defendant Board of Education of the Newburgh Enlarged City School District intentionally discriminated against plaintiff Santina Polera in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794, and awarded damages to plaintiff.

«(a) FILING AND EFFECT OF ARBITRATION AWARD - An arbitration award made by an arbitrator under this chapter, along with proof of service of such award on the other party by the prevailing party or by the plaintiff, shall be filed promptly after the arbitration hearing is concluded with the clerk of the district court that referred the case to arbitraAWARD - An arbitration award made by an arbitrator under this chapter, along with proof of service of such award on the other party by the prevailing party or by the plaintiff, shall be filed promptly after the arbitration hearing is concluded with the clerk of the district court that referred the case to arbitraaward made by an arbitrator under this chapter, along with proof of service of such award on the other party by the prevailing party or by the plaintiff, shall be filed promptly after the arbitration hearing is concluded with the clerk of the district court that referred the case to arbitraaward on the other party by the prevailing party or by the plaintiff, shall be filed promptly after the arbitration hearing is concluded with the clerk of the district court that referred the case to arbitration.

«(1) TIME FOR FILING DEMAND - Within 30 days after the filing of an arbitration award with a district court under subsection (a), any party may file a written demand for a trial de novo in the district court.

In 2005 the company won a lawsuit against National Union Fire Insurance relating to its director's and officers» insurance policy and was awarded a $ 32.1 million judgment by the US District Court.

Judgment on the award rendered by the arbitrator may be entered in the Superior Court of Florida, Orange County, or the United States District Court for the Central District of Florida.

Attacked by two pit bulls while walking to work in November 2015, Joseph Mooring of Bryan, Texas on January 27, 2017 won the second - highest award in a Texas dog attack case: $ 5.1 million for permanent nerve damage to his right leg and forearm, levied not by a jury but by 85th District Court Judge Kyle Hawthorne.

According to the BMA on January 10, 2013, «The Baltimore Museum of Art is pleased that the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia has awarded ownership of the stolen Renoir painting, On the Shore of the Seine, to the Museum.»

Knight awarded Order in the Court $ 250,000 to turn a courtroom in Quincy District Court into a test kitchen to for using new media to cover legal proceedings.

Representative Trial Experience: • Rosa Construction, Inc. v. Capstone Builders, Inc. et al. v. Sterling Savings Bank, Montana Eighteenth Judicial District Court (2013): Five day jury trial resulting in the permanent discharge of Capstone's improper construction lien against Rosa's real property, affirming the priority of Sterling Savings Bank's mortgage on Rosa's real property, and awarding $ 1,425,000 in compensatory damages against Capstone for recording an improper lien on Rosa's real property and interfering with the Bank's mortgage interest.

The District Court denied Kirtsaeng's motion, giving» «substantial weight» to the «objective reasonableness» of Wiley's infringement claim,» and stating that» «the imposition of a fee award against a copyright holder with an objectively reasonable» - although unsuccessful - «litigation position will generally not promote the purposes of the Copyright Act,»» and that no other factors «outweighed» that objective reasonableness to warrant fee - shifting.

Both Wiley and Kirtsaeng proposed that the Court provide guidance to district courts in order to direct their discretion in determining whether to award attorney's fees to a prevailing party «towar [d] the purposes of the Copyright Act,» which the Court articulates as «enriching the general public through access to creative works» and «enhancing the probability that both creators and users... will enjoy the substantive rights» provided by the Copyright Act.

A United States District Court partially enforced an award that covered multiple contracts, after finding that one of the contracts was not within the scope of the arbitration agreement.

An award on the merits against the Russian Federation was delivered by the arbitral tribunal in 2012, while the parallel proceeding with the Stockholm District Court dismissing the Russian Federation's plea for negative declaratory relief was not concluded until 2014.

Although the federal court disagreed with the defendants» argument that the jury award could only have resulted from passion or prejudice, the Southern District of Florida held that the non-economic damages award was not logically supported by the evidence offered at trial.

The Pechersky District Court of Kyiv recently granted enforcement of an SCC arbitral award in a case between Remington Worldwide Limited («Remington») and the State of Ukraine.

Section 505 provides that a district court «may... award a reasonable attorney's fee to the prevailing party» in a copyright action.

A U.S. District Court rejected Argentina's attempt to vacate a USD 21 million international arbitration award in a proceeding administered by ICSID under the...

«Construction Litigation: Fourth District, Division 1 Reverses Fee Awards Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1038 and Reverses / Affirms Others Under Civil Code Section 1717 Main California Supreme Court Refuses To Depublish Bernardi Decision»

The Supreme Court has previously noted that the fee - shifting provision of the Patent Act, which permits district courts to award attorney's fees to prevailing parties in «exceptional cases,» is «similar» to Section 505 of the Copyright Act, which merely permits a court to award reasonable attorney's fees at its discreCourt has previously noted that the fee - shifting provision of the Patent Act, which permits district courts to award attorney's fees to prevailing parties in «exceptional cases,» is «similar» to Section 505 of the Copyright Act, which merely permits a court to award reasonable attorney's fees at its discrecourt to award reasonable attorney's fees at its discretion.

• Boyne USA, Inc. v. Spanish Peaks Development, LLC & Lone Mountain Holdings, LLC, Montana Fifth Judicial District Court (2010): $ 600,000 jury verdict and additional award of punitive damages for breach of contract, deceit, abuse of process and other claims.

The Oberlandesgericht (Higher Regional Court) in the district where the respondent has (i) its seat, (ii) its usual place of business, (iii) an asset, or (iv) where the object of the arbitral award is located.

• Stockman Bank of Montana v. Lien Corporation, Montana Eighteenth Judicial District Court (2009): Trial concerning access to Bank owned commercial property in Bozeman, Montana, and award of $ 42,000 to Bank for intentional interference with Bank's access rights.

One United States District Court found that an award for consequential damages was within the submission to arbitrate even though consequential damages were explicitly precluded by the terms of the underlying contract, in circumstances where consequential damages were included in the terms of reference and a reasoned award by the arbitral tribunal justified their application.823

The Court had previously provided some limited guidance in Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc., 510 U.S. 517 (1994), in which it held that a district court «may not award attorney's fees as a matter of course» but must «make a more particularized, case - by - case assessment.&rCourt had previously provided some limited guidance in Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc., 510 U.S. 517 (1994), in which it held that a district court «may not award attorney's fees as a matter of course» but must «make a more particularized, case - by - case assessment.&rcourt «may not award attorney's fees as a matter of course» but must «make a more particularized, case - by - case assessment.»

On September 3, 2015, Judge Berman of the District Court overturned the suspension, on the basis that there were «significant legal deficiencies» with the Commissioner's award.

Following trial in December 2007, the federal district court on January 16, 2008 awarded judgment to Judge Kendall, held the Commission lacked authority to remove members of the judiciary, and permanently enjoined the Commission from proceeding against Judge Kendall.

-- authored by Circuit Judge Hurwitz [majority decision] and concurring opinion by Circuit Judge Reinhardt; discussed in our Oct. 10, 2015 post: District court in Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act case which substantially reduced fee request was reversed based upon its reliance on inapt practice area hourly rates, upon its discounts for plaintiff's attorneys not delegating tasks to associates given that only small firms prosecuted these type of cases, and upon its use of stale prior fee awards involving fee claimant's attorneys.

We note that the Supreme Court did not decide whether to award fees in this particular case, but sent the case back to the district court for further consideraCourt did not decide whether to award fees in this particular case, but sent the case back to the district court for further consideracourt for further consideration.

In 2013, he received the Massachusetts Bar Association's Community Service Award, and in 2012, Kevin was honored with the Hampden County Bar Association's Access to Justice Pro Bono Publico Award for vision and implementation of the Springfield District Court Lawyer for the Day program.

The District Court's judgment therefore was reversed, and the arbitration award was confirmed.