Commercial Courtwatch | Week of 11/26/23
Chronicling business litigation from the Federal Courts of Appeals and Delaware
Corporate—An acquisition involving Jay-Z’s music streaming company may be “terrible business decision” and “by all accounts, a terrible deal,” but that doesn’t mean the board faced substantial liability for approving it, so demand futility not apply. Chancery dismissed case. DE Supreme Court affirmed.
False Claims Act—Service of process clock under FRCP 4(m) only begins to run once the district court orders service of the unsealed complaint, per Second Circuit.
Class Actions—Third Circuit rejects class settlement for $9 million in “gift cards” of which $2.9 million was claimed, which included $3mm for class counsel because district court erred in not considering appropriateness of using amount claimed as gauge of reasonableness of class fee.
Jurisdiction—No specific jurisdiction over defendants’ actions that violated state privacy law because actions part of general business practices everywhere, Ninth Circuit holds.
Securities—Board not required to approve sale of securities to issuer’s beneficial owner for specific purpose of exempting transaction from 16(b) liability in order to trigger exemption under SEC rule, Ninth Circuit holds.
Trial—Damages verdict vacated because district court erred in letting plaintiff’s CFO testify as lay witnesses under FRE 701 about company’s projected profits without satisfying requirements of FRE 702, per Tenth Circuit.
Patent—Federal Circuit vacates stipulated judgment of infringement vacated because district court failed to address extrinsic evidence that bore on meaning of patent term to POSITA during claim construction.
Patent—Filing subsequent infringement suits in violation of Kessler doctrine justified deeming dismissal of subsequent suits “exceptional” and awarding $5mm in attorneys’ fees, Federal Circuit holds in 2-1 decision.
Patent—No Art. III requirement for filing IPR, but you can’t appeal rejection of IPR to Federal Circuit.
