In this products liability case, Joann Powell sued Profile Design LLC after a bicycle accident allegedly caused by a defective aerobar stem weld, and Profile responded by filing a third-party complaint against several manufacturers, including HL (USA) Corporation, seeking contribution and indemnity under Texas law. The court denied Powell’s motion to dismiss the third-party complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction over the third-party defendants, holding that she lacked standing to raise that issue on their behalf. The court granted HL (USA)’s separate motion to dismiss, concluding that the California corporation had insufficient minimum contacts with Texas for either specific or general personal jurisdiction, as merely placing products into the national stream of commerce, without evidence of purposeful targeting of Texas or substantial business there, does not satisfy due process requirements.
The case involved Wellogix suing Accenture for misappropriation of trade secrets under Texas common law and theft of trade secrets under the Texas Theft Liability Act, alleging that Accenture wrongfully acquired and used Wellogix’s confidential intellectual property related to its software. After a jury trial, the jury found for Wellogix on both claims and awarded $26.2 million in compensatory damages plus $68.2 million in exemplary damages. In ruling on Accenture’s post-trial motions, the court denied the renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, holding that the trial record contained legally sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that a trade secret existed, that it was acquired through improper means or breach of confidence, and that Accenture used it without authorization. The court granted in part the motion for new trial or remittitur, determining that the damages award required adjustment.
This case is a patent infringement suit brought by Shell against RMS Engineering and Tesoro over U.S. Patent No. 6,221,318, which describes a spent catalyst distributor used in fluid catalytic cracking units at oil refineries. The court conducted a Markman hearing to construe disputed claim terms such as 'fluid mass' and related elements of the apparatus for distributing fluids. It denied the defendants' motions for summary judgment on equitable estoppel and laches, as well as on indefiniteness, and denied as moot a motion to exclude expert testimony. The court also denied a later motion for reconsideration or clarification of its claim-construction rulings.
This case stems from the arrest of plaintiff Kerry Thomas in Galveston, Texas, shortly after Hurricane Ike, where police officers approached his home to investigate a generator on a trailer, leading to Thomas being ordered to drop his rifle, physically thrown down stairs, kicked while handcuffed, and jailed without prompt medical care on charges that were later dismissed. Thomas sued the individual officers and the City of Galveston under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming violations of the Fourth, Fourteenth, and Second Amendments, including false arrest, excessive force, denial of medical treatment, and retaliation for gun rights. The court addressed the defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. It granted the motion in part and denied it in part, concluding that some claims against the officers and the city under Monell could proceed based on the detailed factual allegations of misconduct and potential patterns or customs.
This case involves plaintiff Jamie Leigh Jones's claims against KBR defendants arising from her alleged rape by a coworker while employed in Iraq under a Defense Base Act-covered contract, including sexual harassment and hostile work environment under Title VII, assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and related tort claims. The KBR defendants moved for partial summary judgment and dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, arguing preemption or exclusivity of remedies under the Defense Base Act and the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act. The court granted the motions in part and denied them in part, concluding that some common-law claims were barred where their facts overlapped with statutory remedies but permitting claims such as assault and battery against the individual defendant and certain others to proceed.
labor & employmentcivil rightstorts & liabilitycriminal law
This case arose from the death of Aaron Hobart, a man with schizoaffective disorder, following a police response to his parents' 911 call requesting a crisis intervention team officer to transport him for mental health treatment on February 18, 2009. His parents sued the City of Stafford, Officer Jesus Estrada, and Police Chief Bonny Krahn under federal civil rights statutes, alleging constitutional violations in the handling of the encounter. The court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motion for summary judgment, denied the motion to dismiss the amended complaint, and denied non-parties' motions to quash deposition notices. It reasoned that federal law governs questions of evidentiary privilege and identification of final policymakers for municipal liability purposes under Section 1983, while also applying state positive law where relevant to those federal inquiries and finding no basis for absolute legislative privilege in this context.