Search for: "Rohm and Haas Company, Inc."
Results 1 - 18
of 18
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Sep 2011, 1:42 pm
Plaintiffs charge that chemical companies dumped an alleged carcinogen at an industrial complex near their residences. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 11:00 am
Rohm and Haas, however, was not about to let Dow off the hook, and sued the company in Delaware to force it to honor the contract. [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 6:04 am
The Dow Chemical Case Dow was a shareholder derivative suit filed nearly a year ago amid turmoil over Dow’s planned acquisition of another chemical company, Rohm & Haas, for aggregate consideration of approximately $18.8 billion. [read post]
16 Mar 2007, 7:58 pm
The district court granted summary judgment for Rohm and Haas, reasoning that Crosby received all of the life insurance benefits she was due and that the company's conduct did not warrant monetary penalties. [read post]
17 Jan 2010, 8:45 am
On January 11, 2010, a year after a major corporate battle between the Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) and Rohm & Haas Company (“ROH”) regarding a $19 billion merger, Chancellor Chandler dismissed derivative claims including Caremark-type allegations against Dow’s current directors and officers for failure to adequately plead demand futility under Court of Chancery Rule 23.1. [read post]
17 Mar 2014, 7:20 pm
As this court observed in Rohm & Haas Co. v. [read post]
27 Oct 2013, 5:33 pm
Rohm & Haas Co. [read post]
19 Feb 2010, 5:00 am
In re Citigroup Inc. [read post]
5 Apr 2013, 1:16 pm
See Chem-Nuclear Sys., 292 F.3d at 260 (finding defendant failed to prove its own share of the harm); Rohm & Haas Co., 2 F.3d at 1280 (same)." [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 10:44 am
Rohm & Haas Co., 2 F.3d 1265 (3d Cir. 1993), with Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc. v. [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 10:44 am
Rohm & Haas Co., 2 F.3d 1265 (3d Cir. 1993), with Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc. v. [read post]
28 Jun 2007, 1:18 am
Court Rules Against Proposed Medical-Monitoring Class Action
The Legal Intelligencer
A proposed class of current and former Rohm & Haas employees attempting to bring a medical-monitoring action against the chemical manufacturer has been halted by the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. [read post]
31 Oct 2012, 11:00 pm
Rohm & Haas Co., No. 10-2108 (3d Cir., Aug. 25, 2011), as potentially supporting arguments on both sides. [read post]
1 May 2009, 11:00 am
: In re Kubin and KSR International Co v Teleflex Inc (Patent Docs) US Patents – Decisions CAFC: USPTO, Tafas & GSK request extension for reconsideration (IP Watchdog) CAFC: Patent on sex aid is obvious: Ritchie v Vast Resources (AKA Topco) (Patently-O) (Hal Wegner) CAFC: Assigning patent rights: Euclid Chemical v Vector Corrosion (Patently-O) (Hal Wegner) District Court E D Michigan: LEDdynamics wins summary judgment in LED tube patent suit (Green Patent Blog)… [read post]
16 Aug 2009, 11:23 am
The best example of the downside of optionality was the sale of United Rentals Inc. where the buyer, Cerberus, unabashedly chose to pay the break fee rather than close, despite the absence of any material problem in the URI business. [read post]
30 Aug 2010, 6:20 pm
In other words, companies trying for a monopoly beyond the scope of granted patent protection. [read post]
30 Jan 2009, 7:00 pm
(IPKat) (IPKat) IPO launches ‘Supply Chain Toolkit’ best practice toolkit for avoiding fake goods entering business supply chains (IPKat) Welsh patent applications: the results are in (IPKat) United States US General Government blocks release of documents on secret IP enforcement treaty, ACTA (EFF) Potential names for Obama IP team swirl; WTO IP Chief ‘imminent’ (Intellectual Property Watch) John W Thompson leading candidate for Commerce Secretary… [read post]
25 May 2011, 11:46 pm
Co., Inc. v. [read post]
