Winklevoss Twins Finally End Litigation Against Facebook | ITProPortal.com

The Winklevoss twins have finally decided to put an end to their long-standing legal battle with Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook.

The twins, who were contemporaries of Zuckerberg during his days at Harvard, have repeatedly claimed that the Facebook founder stole their idea and later used it to create Facebook.

They reached a $65 million legal settlement with Facebook back in 2008. However, they appealed for better terms than the $20 million in cash and $45 million stocks in the agreement, alleging that Facebook misled them on the true value of the company to reduce the size of the settlement.

The US court hearing the appeal ruled against the Winklevoss twins saying that they could not back out from the deal.

The twins then threatened to appeal to the Supreme Court to challenge the decision by the lower court. However, it seems that the twins have now decided not to bother the Supreme Court with their appeal.

via Winklevoss Twins Finally End Litigation Against Facebook | ITProPortal.com.

Surveys: Companies Still Struggle With e-Discovery

The problem is that companies constantly produce huge volumes of information, but can’t destroy any of it until they know whether it might be needed for litigation. That’s only possible with a centralized litigation function, says Rick Wolf, founder of consulting firm Lexakos. “You can’t effectively manage e-discovery with a decentralized litigation function,” he insists. “It’s like trying to hit a moving target.”

via Surveys: Companies Still Struggle With e-Discovery.

Do you know? Ten tips for effective litigation holds http://bit.ly/cBw5Tq #ediscovery http://bit.ly/apCSqk #ediscovery

Do you know? Ten tips for effective litigation holds http://bit.ly/cBw5Tq #ediscovery http://bit.ly/apCSqk #ediscovery

RT @complexd: Market Research: 88% of FTSE 100 Companies at Risk of Litigation – http://tinyurl.com/39ujvnm

RT @complexd: Market Research: 88% of FTSE 100 Companies at Risk of Litigation – http://tinyurl.com/39ujvnm

Do you know? Ten tips for effective litigation holds http://bit.ly/cBw5Tq #ediscovery

Do you know? Ten tips for effective litigation holds http://bit.ly/cBw5Tq #ediscovery

Shearman plans a radical strategy rethink to boost litigation revenue | Features | The Lawyer http://bit.ly/brTL1d #ediscovery

Shearman plans a radical strategy rethink to boost litigation revenue | Features | The Lawyer http://bit.ly/brTL1d #ediscovery

Mechanisms That Help Reduce the Cost of E-Discovery | NJ Law Journal

No matter how vigilant, there is no way to fully insulate yourself from a potential lawsuit. It should come as no surprise that defending a lawsuit, even one where you are ultimately not liable, can be costly. Advancements in technology, including the ubiquitous use of e-mail, can significantly increase the cost of litigation. With all of the unavoidable expenses associated with litigation, in these economic times it is necessary to implement mechanisms that help curtail the cost of litigation, especially with regard to electronic discovery.

RELEVANT COURT RULES REGARDING E-DISCOVERY

Courts have recognized the importance of technological advancements in litigation by implementing rules that require parties to produce electronic information in discovery. Indeed, both the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the New Jersey Rules of Court (collectively, the “court rules”) require parties to produce their electronically stored information during litigation. Federal Rules 26(a)(1) and N.J. Rules 4:18-1(a).

In federal actions, parties are required to disclose, among other things, documents and other objects within their possession that may be used to support their claims or defenses prior to receiving a discovery request. Federal Rules 26(a)(1)(A)(ii). As of December 1, 2006, the term “documents” has been expanded to include ESI among the type of information and documents produced in litigation. Similarly, the N.J. Rules provide that a party may request ESI from its adversary. N.J. Rules 4:18-1(a).

Although not formally defined in either set of the court rules, in practice it is understood that ESI includes information “created, manipulated, communicated, stored, and best utilized in digital form, requiring the use of computer hardware and software.” “Electronically Stored Information: The December 2006 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,” Kenneth J. Withers, Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, Vol.4 (2), 171, 173. Although the most commonly requested form of ESI is e-mail, the court rules require production of electronic data in formats other than e-mail.

The court rules have attempted to provide some limitations to the production requirements of electronic discovery, presumably in an effort to achieve fairness and balance. For example, in the context of a federal case, “[a] party need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the party identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost.” Federal Rules 26(b)(2)(B). However, even with limitations, the production of ESI can be very expensive and onerous.

via Mechanisms That Help Reduce the Cost of E-Discovery.

Toyota Recall Lawyers Appointed to Leadership Roles in Federal Litigation – AboutLawsuits.com

U.S. District Judge James Selna, who is presiding over the federal Toyota litigation, has appointed 21 plaintiffs’ lawyers to serve in leadership roles in the multidistrict litigation (MDL). The Toyota recall lawyers will perform actions during pretrial proceedings that will benefit all plaintiffs who have filed a product liability lawsuit in federal courts throughout the United States over sudden acceleration problems with Toyota or Lexus vehicles.

Following the recall of millions of vehicles in recent months, a growing number of Toyota class action lawsuits, Toyota accident injury lawsuits and wrongful death lawsuits have been filed in state and federal courts throughout the United States.

Last month, all federal Toyota lawsuits were consolidated and centralized before Judge Selna as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL) for pretrial proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. There are now about 228 federal lawsuits over recalled Toyota vehicles included in the MDL, and there are nearly 100 other lawsuits pending in state courts nationwide.

The litigation comprises of two types of claims: lawsuits alleging that defective Toyota or Lexus vehicles caused a personal injury or death to plaintiffs or their loved ones, and lawsuits claiming that the vehicles lost significant value due to the massive recalls and concerns about the safety.

As part of the coordinated pretrial proceedings, Judge Selna issued an order on May 14 creating two separate committees of lawyers representing the various plaintiffs. Each of the committees will have nine lawyers involved in the Toyota recall litigation, including the lead counsels.

The lead Toyota recall attorneys for the economic loss committee will be Steve Berman, Marc M. Seltzer and Frank Pitre. The lead Toyota personal injury lawyers will be Elizabeth Cabraser, and Mark P. Robinson. The lead counsels will act as spokespersons for all plaintiffs at pretrial hearings and in response to inquiries from the court. They will also submit and argue motions before the court, examine witnesses at hearings and negotiate stipulations and potential Toyota settlement agreements with the defendants, which would apply to all cases.

Judge Selna has also appointed Wylie Aitken, Dawn Barrios and Gretchen M. Nelson to serve as Liaison Counsel. As Liaison Counsel, they will receive and distribute orders from the Court and documents from opposing counsel, and assist in the coordination of activities between both parties.

via Toyota Recall Lawyers Appointed to Leadership Roles in Federal Litigation – AboutLawsuits.com.

Toyota Lawsuit Judge Names Lead Attorneys for Cases – BusinessWeek

The federal judge overseeing sudden- acceleration lawsuits against Toyota Motor Corp. appointed 21 plaintiffs’ lawyers to manage litigation involving U.S. claims.

Toyota, the world’s largest automaker, faces at least 228 federal and 99 state lawsuits including proposed class actions over economic loss and claims of personal injuries or deaths caused by sudden-acceleration incidents. The federal lawsuits were combined April 9 in a multidistrict litigation, or MDL, before U.S. District Judge James V. Selna in Santa Ana, California.

More than 70 plaintiffs’ lawyers sought appointments to leadership positions in the federal lawsuits, including about 60 who spoke at a hearing before Selna yesterday.

Selna’s appointments today include Steve Berman at Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP in Seattle as co-lead counsel for economic loss plaintiffs and Elizabeth Cabraser at Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP in San Francisco as co-lead for personal injury and death cases.

via Toyota Lawsuit Judge Names Lead Attorneys for Cases (Update1) – BusinessWeek.

Israel Tech Deals: IP Laws Power Nano-Nation | Westlaw Business

IP pours forth from Israel, boosting both M&A and legal activity centered on technology. Companies like CheckPoint, Teva and Vishay are the result. IP creation is driven by its IP-fostering laws, its benign IP litigation context (benign being relative), and the noted inventiveness of its citizenry.

For those unfamiliar with the good-news story emanating from this part of the Middle East: Nearly 62 years ago, “nano” nation Israel was born. Notwithstanding its barely-hospitable environment, this nation has transformed itself into a virtual high tech powerhouse. Fostered in part by government agencies, it’ become a global leader in communications, electronics, and the life sciences, among others.

This article explores the legal framework applicable to Israel’s technology transfer regime, how it impacts intellectual property (“IP”) acquisitions by non-Israeli entities, and briefly examines the Israeli litigation landscape surrounding its technology.

via Israel Tech Deals: IP Laws Power Nano-Nation.