Fox Rothschild LLP

With courts across the United States in different and various stages of re-opening to get back to some level of normalcy under the exigent circumstances created by the global coronavirus pandemic, I thought it would be helpful to my clients, co-counsel, and others outside of Delaware to provide an update on the Courts’ operations in

In the Report and Recommendation entered in Helios Streaming, LLC et al. v. Vudu, Inc., Civil Action No. 19-1792-CFC-SRF (D.Del. May 11, 2020), the Honorable Sherry R. Fallon recommends the Court grant defendant Vudu’s partial motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims of induced infringement asserted in Count I, Counts II through V, and Count VII of

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in Malvern Panalytical, Inc. v. TA Instruments-Waters, LLC et al., Civil Action No. 19-2157-RGA (D.Del., May 5, 2020), the Court granted Defendants’ partial motion to dismiss in part by dismissing the willfulness and contributory infringement claims asserted in Plaintiff’s amended complaint.
Plaintiff’s amended complaint asserts

In the highly anticipated decision of Salzberg v. Sciabacucchi, No. 346, 2019, 2020 WL 1280785 (Del. Mar. 18, 2020), the Delaware Supreme Court held that a provision in several Delaware corporations’ charters, requiring that actions arising under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) be brought in federal court, was valid and enforceable.

In Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Group, Inc., No. 18-233, 590 U.S. _____ (2020), the United States Supreme Court held that a plaintiff in a trademark infringement action, brought under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), that alleges and proves trademark infringement is not required to show that the defendant willfully infringed the plaintiff’s trademark as a