ent.) Bajwa sought $554 million plus punitive damages on trade secret misappropriation and misrepresentation claims. Trial began on July 26 in U.S. District Court for Central District of California. On Aug. 10, Ruemmler and Isaacson summed up their opposing positions in closing arguments. Let’s take a look. I

attorney representative. As a result, on October 29, 2007, the parties executed an Addendum wherein it was mutually agreed that former United States District Court Judge Edward B: Davis would serve as the independent third-party. Judge Davis selected the venerable law firm of Podhurst and Josefsberg to represent

. 9:08-CV-80736- KAM (S.D. Fla. 2008) (Exhibit “P”). : 37. Because of the violation of the CVRA, on July 7, 2008, Edwards filed an action in the US. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 9:08-CV-80736, seeking to enforce the rights of E.W. and L.M. That action alleged that the U.S. Attorn

United States District Court Southern District of Florida Virginia L. Giuffre, Plaintiff, Case No.: 9:16-mc-81608-DMM Underlying Case No.: 15-cv-07433-RWS (Southern District of

ura A. Menninger, declare as follows: 1. Iam an attorney at law duly licensed in the State of New York and admitted to practice in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Iam a member of the law firm Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C., counsel of record for Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell

ura A. Menninger, declare as follows: 1. Iam an attorney at law duly licensed in the State of New York and admitted to practice in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Iam a member of the law firm Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C., counsel of record for Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell

1, McGuire v. IBM, et al, Case No.: 1:11CV528, US District Court of Virginia - Eastern Division, Alexandria, Judge Leo

1, McGuire v. IBM, et al, Case No.: 1:11CV528, US District Court of Virginia - Eastern Division, Alexandria, Judge Leo

oing. i On or about May 4, 2009, Virginia Giuffre—identified then as Jane Doe No. 102—filed a complaint against Jeffrey Epstein in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The complaint included allegations made by Giuffre that pertained to Maxwell. 18. In pertinent part, the Jane

mstances. !4° Indeed, in some lower court cases, Rule 2 has proven outcome determinative. For example, in United States v. Broadus, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia used Rule 2 as a basis for deviating from the time limits imposed by Rule 29(c) for the defendant to seek a new trial. '

* Length: 36451 words Author: Paul G. Cassell* * Professor of Law for the S.J. Quinney College of Law of the University of Utah and United States District Court Judge for the District of Utah. Thanks to Doug Beloof, Janna Tucker Davis, Meg Garvin, Wendy Murphy, Judge James Orenstein, and Steve Twist; to my ab

s, and as- sault and battery. Actions were consolidat- ed by Multidistrict Litigation Panel. Vari- ous defendants filed motions to dismiss. Holdings: The District Court, Casey, J., held that: (1) jurisdictional discovery was warranted on issue whether Saudi Arabian bank was immune under Foreign Sovereign Immunities

ssault and battery. Actions were consolidated, various defendants filed motions to dismiss, and plaintiffs moved to supplement the record. Holdings: The District Court, Casey, J., held that: “1 Saudi High Commission (SHC) was entitled to immunity under discretionary function exception to Foreign Sovereign Immunitie

ment with Epstein and Roberts. Edwards, who is a prominent attorney for sexually abused women and children, and Cassell who is a former United States District Court judge who left the bench to advocate for criminal victims, sued Dershowitz for defamation. Edwards and Cassell asserted that the factual allegations

rence: 31E-MM-108062 Serial 19 Enclosure(s): Enclosed for Miami is the server copy of the referenced Grand Jury subpoena issued by the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida on 10/06/2006 and served[_——————idion 10/16/2006. Details: On 10/16/2006, sa[___|Jreceived from saL___} via ee Federal

alert said “Snowden’s U.S. passport was revoked on June 22, 2013,” after the Justice Department unsealed the charges that had been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on June 14, 2013. “The Consul General in Hong Kong confirmed Hong Kong authorities were notified that Mr. Snowde

tim disclosure in sex crimes cases before the Epstein agreement. They nevertheless forged ahead with a pact with Epstein that violated the law. U.S. District Court Judge Kenneth A. Marra wrote: “When the Government gives information to victims, it cannot be misleading. While the Government spent untold hours neg

e been sealed or are heavily redacted. For example, a defamation lawsuit against one of Epstein’s close friends was scheduled to go to trial in U.S. District Court in New York this coming Monday. But both sides agreed to a delay last week, often a signal that a settlement could be in the works. The suit was fil

csnecsuessecesscesscasecasecnscsnscsueeseceuscesecasecasesusesueesneesecescesecasecasecnsesuscsueeseeeseeesecasecasecneeaneesetseeeseeeseensess 63 I. The District Court Improperly Dismissed the Anti-Terrorism Act Claims .......cceccessssesseeceesereeerneeenteeeees 63 A. The ATA Is Construed Broadly and Readily Encom

hat they defrauded the bank and misrepresented InfoSpan as an established business with a working technology. Two years later, InfoSpan sued in U.S. District Court in Santa Ana and alleged that its technology was working and that it delivered its source code to the bank on servers. Emirates ended the deal, InfoS