Cases

O’MALLEY, Circuit Judge, concurring in part and dissenting in part. I agree with and join the majority’s well-reasoned rulings on three of the four claim terms in dispute: “continuous contact,” “preferential activation zone,” and “ribbon.” I disagree, however, with its analysis and conclusion regarding the fourth claim term, “continuous microtextured skin layer.” I believe t

328 S.W.3d 184 (2010) 3M COMPANY, Appellant, v. Hon. William ENGLE III, Judge, Perry Circuit Court, et al., Appellees. and Kentucky Mine Supply, et al., Real Parties in Interest. American Optical Corporation and 3M Company, Appellants, v. Delbert Miller, et al., Appellees. Nos. 2010-SC-000125-MR, 2010-SC-000163-MR. Supreme Court of Kentucky. December 16, 2010.</

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals Rita Joyce Glenn, individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Thomas Harold Glenn, deceased, Respondent, v. 3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co.; Air & Liquid Systems Corporation, Individually and as Successor-In-Interest to Buffalo Pumps; Airgas USA, LLC; Aurora Pump; BW/IP Inc., a Subsidiary of Flowserve Corporation; CBS Corporation, a Delaware Corporation f/k/a Viacom, Inc., Success

Emmet G. Sullivan, United States District Judge Plaintiff Sebastian Phillips ("Mr. Phillips"), a Naval Architect, and his architecture and engineering firm, Plaintiff Marine Design Dynamics, Inc. ("MDD"), allege that they have been effectively debarred from future government contracts with the United States Department of the Navy since 2011. Plaintiffs sued the Secretary of the Navy, the Chief and Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, a

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE: ASBESTOS LITIGATION WERNER RATH, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) C.A. No. N17C-08-228 ASB 3M COMPANY, et al. ) ) Defendants. ) OPINION Submitted: March 27, 2019 Decided: April 18, 2019 Upon Defendant Delmarva Power & Light Company ’s Motion for Summary Judgment, GRANTED. Upon Defena’ants Four Star Oz`l & Gas Compcmy, TRMI-H LLC, and Texaco Inc. ’s Motionfor Summarjy Jua'gment, GRANTED. Upon Defendant Sunoco (R&M), LLC ’s Motion for Summary J

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SEBASTIAN PHILLIPS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. No. 11-cv-02021 (EGS) RICHARD V. SPENCER, 1 Secretary of the Navy, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Sebastian Phillips (“Mr. Phillips”), a Naval Architect, and his architecture and engineering firm

IN THE MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS WESTERN DISTRICT KATHERINE O’HAVER, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) WD86040 ) 3M COMPANY, ) Opinion filed: June 18, 2024 ) Respondent. ) APPEAL

KEARSE, Circuit Judge: In these two civil enforcement actions for securities fraud — brought, respectively* by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) and the Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) against defendants Stephen Walsh and Paul Greenwood, et al., and consolidated by this Court for appeal — various entities that were defrauded by the defend

136 P.3d 1047 (2006) 2006 OK 28 3M DOZER SERVICE, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Barbara Moore BAKER a/k/a Barbara J. Moore a/k/a Barbara Jean Baker; Spouse, if any, of Barbara Moore Baker, real name unknown; Karen Sue Moore; Spouse, if any, of Karen Sue Moore, real name unknown; Mark D. Stewart, Sherry L. Stewart; and their unknown heirs or devisees, Defendants/Appellees, and Debra K. Foster; Spouse, if any, of Debra K

MEMORANDUM OPINION EMMET G. SULLIVAN, District Judge. Plaintiffs, Sebastian Phillips and the company he owns, Marine Design Dynamics, Inc. (hereinafter “MDD”), bring suit against various officials in the United States Navy as well as certain of MDD’s former employees. Plaintiffs allege they were effectively debarred from government contracti

500 Argued and submitted December 14, 2017, affirmed February 26, 2020 Sally PHILLIPS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant-Respondent. Yamhill County Circuit Court 15CV08801; A163831 461 P3d 1008 Plaintiff filed a claim with State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (State

188 Wis.2d 25 (1994) 523 N.W.2d 578 Phillip W. OLSON, and Randal F. Konichek, Plaintiffs-Appellants,[†] v. 3M COMPANY, Maynard Schultz, City of Prairie Du Chien, Prairie Du Chien Police Department, Gary R. Knickerbocker, Terry J. Zinkle, and Hartford Insurance Group (ITT Hartford), Defendants-Respondents. No. 93-2418. Court of Appeals of Wisconsin.

FILED January 30, 2025 In the Office of the Clerk of Court WA State Court of Appeals, Division III IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION THREE JOUMANA B. AL HAYEK, and ) No. 39989-3

Judge Roland L. Belsome hln preparation for trial on this meso-thelioma case, the plaintiff served trial subpoenas on numerous defendant corporations for the in-court appearance of a corporate representative at trial. The defendant corporations filed motions to quash the subpoenas. The trial court granted the motions to quash as to the corporations that were not domiciled in Louisiana. The plaintiff filed an application for su

COOK, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which SILER, J., joined. SUTTON, J. (pp. 555-61), delivered a separate dissenting opinion. *539OPINION COOK, Circuit Judge. NicSand, Inc. (NicSand), a marketer of automotive abrasives, brought this antitrust action against its competitor, 3M Company (3M), alleging

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 03-1269, -1286 EDWARD H. PHILLIPS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AWH CORPORATION, HOPEMAN BROTHERS, INC., and LOFTON CORPORATION, Defendants-Cross Appellants. Carl F. M

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2004-IA-00289-SCT 3M COMPANY v. SIMEON JOHNSON, et al. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/24/2004 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. JANNIE M. LEWIS COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: HOLMES COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: BARRY W. FORD WALKER (BILL) JONES, III

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2002-CA-01651-SCT 3M COMPANY f/k/a MINNESOTA MINING AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY v. SIMEON JOHNSON, JAMES CURRY, BOBBY JOE LAWRENCE AND PHILLIP PATE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/30/2002 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. JANNIE M. LEWIS COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: HOLMES COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: DONN

MEMORANDUM, ORDER, AND JUDGMENT ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge: This action arises out of the acquisition in late 2006 and early 2007 by Plaintiff Meda AB (“Meda”) of a European pharmaceutical business from Defendant 3M Company (“3M”). Meda alleges that 3M breached the acquisition agreement signed on November 8, 2006 (“Acquisition Agreement”), as well as the implied covenant of good faith and fair deali

*1118MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DONOVAN W. FRANK, District Judge. INTRODUCTION This matter is before the Court on the issue of patent claim construction pursuant to Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370, 116 S.Ct. 1384, 134 L.Ed.2d 577 (1996). BACKGROUND This liti