Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “Michael Carlson v. 3M Company”
Andover Healthcare, Inc. v. 3M Companypublic domain
COLLOTON, Circuit Judge. Andover Healthcare, Inc., appeals an order of the district court 1 denying And-over’s petition under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 for discovery to be used in a patent-infringement suit in Germany. We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion, and we therefore affirm the order.
3M Company and Subsidiariespublic domain
United States Tax Court 160 T.C. No. 3 3M COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent ————— Docket No. 5816-13. Filed February 9, 2023. ————— P is the common parent company of the P consolidated group. As
3M Co. v. Moldex-Metric, Inc.public domain
(2008) 3M COMPANY, and 3M Innovative Properties Company, Plaintiffs, v. MOLDEX-METRIC, INC., Defendant. Civil No. 03-5292 (MJD/AJB). United States District Court, D. Minnesota. May 13, 2008. MEMORANDUM & ORDER MICHAEL J. DAVIS, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This matter is before the Court for a Markman hearing: T
Microtek Medical, Inc v. 3M Companypublic domain
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2005-CA-01860-SCT MICROTEK MEDICAL, INC. v. 3M COMPANY DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/31/2005 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. KENNETH M. BURNS COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: LOWNDES COUNTY CHANCERY COURT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: BRENDA B. BETHANY C. MICHAEL ELLI
Microtek Medical, Inc. v. 3M Co.public domain
942 So.2d 122 (2006) MICROTEK MEDICAL, INC. v. 3M COMPANY. No. 2005-CA-01860-SCT. Supreme Court of Mississippi. October 5, 2006. *124 Brenda B. Bethany, Jackson, C. Michael Ellingburg, attorneys for appellant. Melody McAnally, W. Wayne Drinkwater, Jr., Jackson, attorneys for appellee. EN BANC. CARLSON, Justic
Michael Oien v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.public domain
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 22-2374 ___________________________ Michael A. Oien Plaintiff - Appellant v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., a Delaware Business Corporation, doing business as The Home Depot
Dorothy Smith v. Schlage Lock Company, LLCpublic domain
PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1391 DOROTHY E. SMITH, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Julian Jackson Smith, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SCHLAGE LOCK COMPANY, LLC, Defendant - Appellee, and AMETEK, INC., sued individually and as successor-in-interest to Haveg
Michael Scott Giesler v. Kelly Ann Gieslerpublic domain
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-08-00734-CV Michael Scott Giesler, Appellant v.
Michael Scott Giesler v. Kelly Ann Gieslerpublic domain
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-08-00734-CV Michael Scott Giesler, Appellant v. Kelly Ann Giesler, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 126TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1-FM-06-004964, HONORABLE SUZANNE COVINGTON, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION
2013 WI 77 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 2012AP805 & 2012AP840 COMPLETE TITLE: Scott N. Waller and Lynnea S. Waller, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. American Transmission Company, LLC, Defendant-Appellant.
PICKETT, Circuit Judge. Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, a Delaware corporation, brought this action alleging that its patent No. 2,714,066 1 had been infringed by the defendants, Bewal, Inc., which was sales agent for Polychrome Corporation, the manufacturer of th
Harvinder Singh v. American Honda Finance Corp.public domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT HARVINDER SINGH, No. 17-35964 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 2:17-cv-00287- JCC AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. HARVINDER SINGH, No. 17-35967 Plaintiff-Appellan
SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag SCA Personal Care, Inc. v. First Quality Baby Products, LLCpublic domain
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ SCA HYGIENE PRODUCTS AKTIEBOLAG SCA PERSONAL CARE, INC., Plaintiffs-Appellants v. FIRST QUALITY BABY PRODUCTS, LLC, FIRST QUALITY HYGIENIC, INC., FIRST QUALITY PRODUCTS, INC. AND FIRST QUALITY RETAIL SERVICES, LLC, Defendants-Appellees ______________________ 20
Zimmerman v. Crothallpublic domain
OPINION PARSONS, Vice Chancellor. This case addresses the allegations of a minority unitholder in a privately held medical device company. The unitholder is the co-founder and former CEO of the company. He became a minority stakeholder after accepting investments in the company in exchange for units and after he sold some of his own units. The company is managed by a board of directors under its limited liab
Evans v. Flowserve U.S. Inc.public domain
ORDER Sue L. Robinson, Senior United States District Judge At Wilmington this 8th day of March, 2017, having considered the Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Sherry R. Fallon on February 15,2017, and upon the expiration of the time allowed for objections pursuant to Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure with no objections having been filed; IT
CHUTICH, Justice. This case requires us to clarify the proper method for calculating the quantum meruit1 value of an attorney's services when a client terminates the contingent-fee agreement before a matter concludes. Respondent API, Inc. Asbestos Settlement Trust (API Trust), retained appellant Faricy Law Firm, P.A. (Faricy), under a contingent-fee agreement to assist with asbestos litigation. Faricy re
Andrews Farms v. Calcot, Ltd.public domain
693 F.Supp.2d 1154 (2010) ANDREWS FARMS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CALCOT, LTD., Eadie and Payne, and Robert W. Norris, Defendants. Case No. CV-F-07-0464 LJO DLB. United States District Court, E.D. California. February 16, 2010. *1155 Ralph B. Wegis, Michael Jonathan Stump, The Law Offices of Ralph B. Wegis, P.C., Bakersfield, CA, f
Act II Jewelry, LLC v. Wootenpublic domain
Harry D. Leinenweber, Judge, United States District Court Before the Court are Cross-Motions for Partial Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs Act II Jewelry, LLC, Kiam Equities Corp. ("KEC"), F-Five LLC, Victor K. Kiam, III, and Elena Kiam (collectively, "Act II") move for summary judgment on the breach of fiduciary duty claim and all remaining counterclaims. Defendants Elizabeth Ann Wooten, Adornable-U, LLC, Nicole Mead, Shannon Eckels,
City of Wyoming v. Procter & Gamble Co.public domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS . John R. Tunheim, Chief Judge United States District Court Hygienic wipes labeled and sold as “flushable” have caused and are continuing to cause increased costs and property damage to the governmental entities that operate sewer systems and water treatment facilities. These “flushable” wipes do not break down like toilet paper—or at least not all of
MicroAire Surgical Instruments, LLC v. Arthrex, Inc.public domain
726 F.Supp.2d 604 (2010) MICROAIRE SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. ARTHREX, INC., Defendant. Case No. 3:09-cv-00078. United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Charlottesville Division. June 3, 2010. *610 Michael Edward Whitham, Philana Shell Handler, Robert Neal Cook, Whitham, Curtis & Christofferson & Cook, P