This document is a complaint filed by Infusive Technologies, LLC against Sagent Holding Co. for breach of an Asset Acquisition Agreement. The complaint alleges that under the agreement, Sagent acquired certain patents from Infusive and agreed to use reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize the patented products. It further alleges that Sagent failed to use reasonable efforts, failed to obtain FDA approval for a product, and failed to pay Infusive $1.25 million as required by the agreement, constituting a breach that has damaged Infusive. The complaint requests damages and assignment of the patents back to Infusive.
This document is an opinion and order from a United States District Court case between Siltronic Corporation and various insurance companies including Employers Insurance Company of Wausau regarding insurance coverage and payment of defense costs for environmental claims arising from contamination at the Portland Harbor Superfund site. The court considers Siltronic's motion for partial summary judgment that Wausau has a continuing duty to defend Siltronic under its 1978-79 insurance policy and must reimburse unpaid defense costs. The court provides background on the insurance policies and contamination issues before analyzing the relevant policy provisions and ruling on the motions.
National union v. redbox order on msj august 7 2014 wd waSeth Row
This order addresses National Union Fire Insurance Company's motion for summary judgment regarding its duties to defend and indemnify Redbox Automated Retail in various lawsuits. The court grants in part and denies in part the motion. Specifically, the court finds that National Union has a duty to defend Redbox in the Cain lawsuit, which alleges violations of Michigan's video rental privacy law, but not in the Mehrens lawsuit, which alleges violations of California's credit card receipt law. The court also finds that while National Union may issue reservations of rights and set reasonable rate caps when defending insureds, it must do so reasonably and in good faith.
Since intellectual property rights (IPRs) constitute a civil right, civil enforcement plays a critical role in
IPR enforcement. However, our analysis of statistics on IPR infringement and enforcement in reports
from enforcement agencies reveals that the vast majority of IPR infringement cases in Vietnam have
been resolved under administrative route over the past time. While thousands of IP infringement
cases are handled administratively each year, only a few cases are tried by courts. The administrative
mechanism is said to be more expeditious, compact, simple, and economical in handling IPR
infringements than the lengthy trial, complicated, and costly procedures of the civil mechanism. The
above dispute-resolution situation in Vietnam results in a fact that civil relations and civil disputes are
largely resolved under administrative proceedings, resulting in inadequate protection of IPRs and,
more seriously, many violations continuing to reoccur through larger scale and more sophisticated
tricks.
Government Contracts And Your Intellectual Propertydbolton007
The document discusses intellectual property rights related to government contracts. It covers various types of intellectual property including patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, and data/software rights. It summarizes key clauses in government contracts that address allocation of intellectual property rights and responsibilities, such as 52.227-14 Rights in Data - General. It also discusses considerations for patenting, licensing agreements, indemnification, and proprietary information exchange agreements.
Acuerdo lucha de falsificación de comercio p2 p (acta)Jaume Satorra
This document provides an April 2010 draft of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). It includes initial provisions, definitions, and chapters on legal frameworks for intellectual property enforcement. The draft text is still being negotiated between participants and contains bracketed options throughout. Key aspects covered include general obligations of parties, availability of civil and criminal procedures and remedies, provisional measures, special requirements related to border measures, criminal offenses, and international cooperation.
This document provides an April 2010 draft of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). It includes initial provisions, definitions, and chapters on legal frameworks for intellectual property enforcement. The draft text is still being negotiated between participants and contains bracketed options throughout. Key aspects covered include general obligations of parties, availability of civil and criminal procedures and remedies, provisional measures, special requirements related to border measures, criminal offenses, and international cooperation.
This document is an opinion and order from a United States District Court case between Siltronic Corporation and various insurance companies including Employers Insurance Company of Wausau regarding insurance coverage and payment of defense costs for environmental claims arising from contamination at the Portland Harbor Superfund site. The court considers Siltronic's motion for partial summary judgment that Wausau has a continuing duty to defend Siltronic under its 1978-79 insurance policy and must reimburse unpaid defense costs. The court provides background on the insurance policies and contamination issues before analyzing the relevant policy provisions and ruling on the motions.
National union v. redbox order on msj august 7 2014 wd waSeth Row
This order addresses National Union Fire Insurance Company's motion for summary judgment regarding its duties to defend and indemnify Redbox Automated Retail in various lawsuits. The court grants in part and denies in part the motion. Specifically, the court finds that National Union has a duty to defend Redbox in the Cain lawsuit, which alleges violations of Michigan's video rental privacy law, but not in the Mehrens lawsuit, which alleges violations of California's credit card receipt law. The court also finds that while National Union may issue reservations of rights and set reasonable rate caps when defending insureds, it must do so reasonably and in good faith.
Since intellectual property rights (IPRs) constitute a civil right, civil enforcement plays a critical role in
IPR enforcement. However, our analysis of statistics on IPR infringement and enforcement in reports
from enforcement agencies reveals that the vast majority of IPR infringement cases in Vietnam have
been resolved under administrative route over the past time. While thousands of IP infringement
cases are handled administratively each year, only a few cases are tried by courts. The administrative
mechanism is said to be more expeditious, compact, simple, and economical in handling IPR
infringements than the lengthy trial, complicated, and costly procedures of the civil mechanism. The
above dispute-resolution situation in Vietnam results in a fact that civil relations and civil disputes are
largely resolved under administrative proceedings, resulting in inadequate protection of IPRs and,
more seriously, many violations continuing to reoccur through larger scale and more sophisticated
tricks.
Government Contracts And Your Intellectual Propertydbolton007
The document discusses intellectual property rights related to government contracts. It covers various types of intellectual property including patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, and data/software rights. It summarizes key clauses in government contracts that address allocation of intellectual property rights and responsibilities, such as 52.227-14 Rights in Data - General. It also discusses considerations for patenting, licensing agreements, indemnification, and proprietary information exchange agreements.
Acuerdo lucha de falsificación de comercio p2 p (acta)Jaume Satorra
This document provides an April 2010 draft of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). It includes initial provisions, definitions, and chapters on legal frameworks for intellectual property enforcement. The draft text is still being negotiated between participants and contains bracketed options throughout. Key aspects covered include general obligations of parties, availability of civil and criminal procedures and remedies, provisional measures, special requirements related to border measures, criminal offenses, and international cooperation.
This document provides an April 2010 draft of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). It includes initial provisions, definitions, and chapters on legal frameworks for intellectual property enforcement. The draft text is still being negotiated between participants and contains bracketed options throughout. Key aspects covered include general obligations of parties, availability of civil and criminal procedures and remedies, provisional measures, special requirements related to border measures, criminal offenses, and international cooperation.
This document is an affidavit from Mark Weinsten in support of LodgeNet Interactive Corporation filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and the relief sought in various first day motions. It provides background on LodgeNet's financial difficulties and proposed restructuring, including a $60 million investment from Colony Capital in exchange for 100% ownership of reorganized LodgeNet under a prepackaged Chapter 11 plan that has already received creditor support. The affidavit also summarizes various motions seeking court approval of procedures to allow LodgeNet to continue operating in bankruptcy with minimal disruption.
This document is an amended plan of reorganization filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for LodgeNet Interactive Corporation and its affiliates, who are debtors in Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases. The plan proposes reorganizing the debtors' capital structure and financial obligations under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. It defines key terms used in the plan and establishes classes of claims and interests to determine how prepetition obligations will be treated under the plan.
Writing Sample Drafted Term Sheet for Transactional Law Meets CompetitionAnthony Maddaluno
The document outlines the principal terms of a proposed triangular merger between DeSalt Industries, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Arrowhead Enterprises, Inc., and SeaCatcher Technologies LLC. Key terms include SeaCatcher forming a new subsidiary (SeaCatcher Merger Sub) that will merge with and into DeSalt, with DeSalt surviving as a new entity (NewCo) owned 33% by Arrowhead and 66% by SeaCatcher. The closing date is set for no later than March 11, 2016. Protections for Arrowhead as the minority shareholder are also outlined.
This document provides guidance on how to protect intellectual property when applying for and receiving Department of Energy funding. It discusses identifying and marking confidential information in funding applications. For inventions made with funding, the government typically owns the IP, but contractors can elect to retain ownership under certain conditions. The document outlines ownership rights and licensing for both inventions and technical data, and strategies for negotiating favorable IP terms that allow commercialization. It provides guidance on identifying deliverables and the source of their funding to influence the allocation of IP rights.
This document is a complaint filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) against John McAfee and Jimmy Watson alleging securities law violations related to their promotion of initial coin offerings (ICOs) on Twitter. Specifically, the SEC alleges that from 2017-2018:
1) McAfee promoted at least seven ICOs on Twitter without disclosing that he was paid over $23 million by the issuers to do so. When asked, he lied about being paid for the promotions.
2) McAfee falsely claimed to be an investor in and advisor to some of the ICO projects, when in reality his tweets were paid promotions disguised as impartial advice.
3) After his paid promotions
This document provides an overview of the SARFAESI Act of 2002 in India, which allows secured creditors like banks to enforce security interest on loan defaults without court intervention. It discusses the historical context leading to the legislation, including issues with previous legal processes for debt recovery. Key aspects covered include definitions of terms like default, financial asset and security interest. It also outlines the step-by-step process under the Act for secured creditors to issue notices, take possession of assets, and handle objections and representations from borrowers.
United states securities_and_exchange_v_middleton_et_al__nyedce-19-04625__0001.0Hindenburg Research
SEC files emergency action to stop the founders of VERI tokens from dissipating the remaining $8 million of allegedly fraudulently raised crypto proceeds
Equitas Bio/Pharma Solutions filed a complaint against Predictive Technology Group in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and fraud. Equitas and Predictive entered into a Master Services Agreement and several Project Work Orders whereby Equitas would provide consulting services to Predictive. However, Predictive failed to make several required payments to Equitas totaling over $300,000 and failed to cure after notice, constituting a breach of contract.
The Federal Trade Commission and state agencies in New Jersey filed a complaint against VIZIO, Inc. and VIZIO Inscape Services, LLC alleging the following:
1) Since 2014, VIZIO televisions have continuously tracked what consumers watch and transmitted this data to VIZIO through proprietary software without obtaining consumers' consent.
2) VIZIO earns revenue by licensing consumers' viewing data to third parties for audience measurement, advertising analysis, and targeted advertising purposes.
3) Consumers were not adequately notified about the collection and use of their viewing data. A brief on-screen notice failed to obtain meaningful consent from consumers.
USPTO patent 13573002 final rejection responseSteven McGee
patent application 13/573,002 Supreme Court Alice Corp V CLS Bank compliant application "claims may not direct towards abstract ideas" implies requirement for physical meme. Little League Baseball Tournament physical meme first (and best) physical meme embodiment compliant with SC Alice Corp Vs CLS Bank see http://sawconcepts.com/index/id46.html
Stock exchange card is an intangible asset, entitled for depreciation under t...D Murali ☆
Stock exchange card is an intangible asset, entitled for depreciation under the IT Act in income computation - T. N. Pandey - Article published in Business Advisor, dated April 10, 2015 http://www.magzter.com/IN/Shrinikethan/Business-Advisor/Business/
How to Successfully Argue Wide Use Evidence in Trademark Opposition and Cance...KENFOX IP & Law Office
Trademark opposition and cancellation serve as crucial legal remedies for legitimate trademark owners to safeguard their intellectual property rights. In Vietnam, genuine trademark owners are entitled to employ their prior evidence of wide use to file a Notice of Opposition or a cancellation action against a trademark squatter. As such, it is critical to understand how National Office of Intellectual Property of Vietnam (IP VIETNAM) evaluates the evidence of prior use and the extent to which a mark must be used to succeed in an opposition or cancellation based on unregistered rights.
Acusação da SEC para a Pirâmide Financeira Wings NetworkGonçalo Silva
This document is a complaint filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission against Tropikgadget FZE, Tropikgadget Unipessoal LDA, and 15 individuals. The SEC alleges that the defendants operated a fraudulent Ponzi and pyramid scheme through a multi-level marketing company called Wings Network. While representing that Wings Network sold digital and mobile products, the SEC claims it primarily used money from new investors to pay earlier investors with little revenue from actual product sales. The SEC is seeking emergency relief including asset freezes and injunctions to halt the alleged ongoing violations and preserve assets for defrauded investors.
This document summarizes several recent Malaysian tax cases from 2018. It discusses cases related to withholding tax, reinvestment allowance, income tax act, real property gain tax, industrial building allowance, and sales and service tax. For each case, it outlines the key issues, facts, and decisions of the court. The document is a copyrighted presentation by KTP & THK and readers are advised to seek professional tax advice.
The document provides summaries of several SAT orders and exemption orders related to legal matters heard by SEBI.
The first case summary describes a SAT order that reduced a penalty on Vitro Commodities Private Limited from Rs. 10 lakhs to Rs. 1 lakh for failing to disclose acquiring over 5% shareholding in a company in violation of takeover regulations. The SAT clarified the relevant regulations were not substantially different, so penalties for both violations were not justified.
The second summary involves a SAT appeal regarding an SEBI observation letter directing appellants to revise an open offer price based on prior share acquisitions. The SAT allowed the appeal, finding the letter could be challenged and that determining regulation violations requires
Studio 417 inc. v. the cincinnati insuranceBolinLawGroup
This order denies the defendant insurance company's motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs, who are businesses that own restaurants and hair salons, filed a lawsuit against their insurance provider seeking coverage for losses they incurred when the businesses were forced to close due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The defendant argued that the insurance policies required "physical loss or damage" and that COVID-19 does not cause such physical alterations. However, the court found that the policies do not define "physical loss" and its plain meaning could include loss of use, which the plaintiffs allegedly experienced when they were prohibited from operating their businesses. Therefore, the plaintiffs adequately stated claims under the various coverage provisions of the policies, and the defendant's motion to dismiss was denied.
Safeguard Mechanism in Jordan by Bashar H MalkawiBashar H Malkawi
The WTO Agreement on Safeguards prescribes each member to adopt appropriate domestic legislation before it imposes safeguard measures. Historically, Jordan enacted its first WTO-compatible safeguard law, known as the National Production Protection Law No.4 of 1998 (“NPP Law”), in 1998 on the eve of Jordan’s accession to the WTO. Afterward, it amended its NPP Law of 1998. So now, Jordan’s safeguard system is based on the amended NPP Law No. 50 of 2002 and Regulation on Safeguard of National Production. The article also examines safeguard measures under the U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement.
This document summarizes a research essay about the case of Industrias Ceresita S.A., the first company prosecuted under Chile's Law 20,393 on criminal liability of legal persons. The essay describes how Industrias Ceresita paid a municipal official a bribe to obtain a permit, in violation of the law. It then discusses the agreement reached between the company and prosecutors, where the company's proceedings were conditionally suspended for two years subject to implementing compliance programs and donating land and resources to the community. The essay aims to analyze this implications of this landmark case in the context of OECD and Chilean policies on combating foreign bribery.
Vietnam's 2022 amended IP Law - What do new trademark provisions mean for you...KENFOX IP & Law Office
Intellectual property is regarded as a company's most important and valuable asset. In particular, it cannot be denied that a trademark is the industrial property object with the highest commercial exploitation value. Numerous amendments and additions have been made to Vietnam's 2022 Intellectual Property Law in order to improve the effectiveness of the intellectual property protection mechanism and fulfill Vietnam's legal obligations under International intellectual property agreements to which Vietnam is a signatory, including CPTPP, EVFTA, and RCEP... These amendments and supplements are akin to a complete overhaul of Vietnam's intellectual property law, helping to address legal loopholes that have persisted for many years since the 2005 IP law was promulgated and amended in 2009 and 2019. The following article gives an analysis and evaluation of the revised trademark regulations in the 2022 IP Law, assisting you in comprehending the applicable legislation to determine the appropriate actions, and the impact on your brand protection strategy in Vietnam.
This SEC complaint alleges that Stephen Burns, former CEO of electric vehicle company Lordstown Motors, made negligent and materially inaccurate statements about pre-orders for Lordstown's pickup truck. Specifically, Lordstown claimed to have over 27,000 pre-orders from commercial fleets based on non-binding letters of intent, but the company had no effective processes for vetting customers or tracking pre-orders. The SEC alleges Burns' statements about pre-orders created an unrealistic depiction of demand in violation of securities laws.
The document is a letter from Nathan Anderson to the Board of Directors, Executives and Auditors of Tingo Group Inc. listing 38 questions regarding Tingo Group's business operations and financials. The questions raise serious doubts about the legitimacy of Tingo's reported revenues, customer and supplier relationships, licenses and permits. Key issues highlighted include a lack of evidence for Tingo's claimed cash balances, inventory, export volumes and mobile network operations.
This document is an affidavit from Mark Weinsten in support of LodgeNet Interactive Corporation filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and the relief sought in various first day motions. It provides background on LodgeNet's financial difficulties and proposed restructuring, including a $60 million investment from Colony Capital in exchange for 100% ownership of reorganized LodgeNet under a prepackaged Chapter 11 plan that has already received creditor support. The affidavit also summarizes various motions seeking court approval of procedures to allow LodgeNet to continue operating in bankruptcy with minimal disruption.
This document is an amended plan of reorganization filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for LodgeNet Interactive Corporation and its affiliates, who are debtors in Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases. The plan proposes reorganizing the debtors' capital structure and financial obligations under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. It defines key terms used in the plan and establishes classes of claims and interests to determine how prepetition obligations will be treated under the plan.
Writing Sample Drafted Term Sheet for Transactional Law Meets CompetitionAnthony Maddaluno
The document outlines the principal terms of a proposed triangular merger between DeSalt Industries, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Arrowhead Enterprises, Inc., and SeaCatcher Technologies LLC. Key terms include SeaCatcher forming a new subsidiary (SeaCatcher Merger Sub) that will merge with and into DeSalt, with DeSalt surviving as a new entity (NewCo) owned 33% by Arrowhead and 66% by SeaCatcher. The closing date is set for no later than March 11, 2016. Protections for Arrowhead as the minority shareholder are also outlined.
This document provides guidance on how to protect intellectual property when applying for and receiving Department of Energy funding. It discusses identifying and marking confidential information in funding applications. For inventions made with funding, the government typically owns the IP, but contractors can elect to retain ownership under certain conditions. The document outlines ownership rights and licensing for both inventions and technical data, and strategies for negotiating favorable IP terms that allow commercialization. It provides guidance on identifying deliverables and the source of their funding to influence the allocation of IP rights.
This document is a complaint filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) against John McAfee and Jimmy Watson alleging securities law violations related to their promotion of initial coin offerings (ICOs) on Twitter. Specifically, the SEC alleges that from 2017-2018:
1) McAfee promoted at least seven ICOs on Twitter without disclosing that he was paid over $23 million by the issuers to do so. When asked, he lied about being paid for the promotions.
2) McAfee falsely claimed to be an investor in and advisor to some of the ICO projects, when in reality his tweets were paid promotions disguised as impartial advice.
3) After his paid promotions
This document provides an overview of the SARFAESI Act of 2002 in India, which allows secured creditors like banks to enforce security interest on loan defaults without court intervention. It discusses the historical context leading to the legislation, including issues with previous legal processes for debt recovery. Key aspects covered include definitions of terms like default, financial asset and security interest. It also outlines the step-by-step process under the Act for secured creditors to issue notices, take possession of assets, and handle objections and representations from borrowers.
United states securities_and_exchange_v_middleton_et_al__nyedce-19-04625__0001.0Hindenburg Research
SEC files emergency action to stop the founders of VERI tokens from dissipating the remaining $8 million of allegedly fraudulently raised crypto proceeds
Equitas Bio/Pharma Solutions filed a complaint against Predictive Technology Group in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and fraud. Equitas and Predictive entered into a Master Services Agreement and several Project Work Orders whereby Equitas would provide consulting services to Predictive. However, Predictive failed to make several required payments to Equitas totaling over $300,000 and failed to cure after notice, constituting a breach of contract.
The Federal Trade Commission and state agencies in New Jersey filed a complaint against VIZIO, Inc. and VIZIO Inscape Services, LLC alleging the following:
1) Since 2014, VIZIO televisions have continuously tracked what consumers watch and transmitted this data to VIZIO through proprietary software without obtaining consumers' consent.
2) VIZIO earns revenue by licensing consumers' viewing data to third parties for audience measurement, advertising analysis, and targeted advertising purposes.
3) Consumers were not adequately notified about the collection and use of their viewing data. A brief on-screen notice failed to obtain meaningful consent from consumers.
USPTO patent 13573002 final rejection responseSteven McGee
patent application 13/573,002 Supreme Court Alice Corp V CLS Bank compliant application "claims may not direct towards abstract ideas" implies requirement for physical meme. Little League Baseball Tournament physical meme first (and best) physical meme embodiment compliant with SC Alice Corp Vs CLS Bank see http://sawconcepts.com/index/id46.html
Stock exchange card is an intangible asset, entitled for depreciation under t...D Murali ☆
Stock exchange card is an intangible asset, entitled for depreciation under the IT Act in income computation - T. N. Pandey - Article published in Business Advisor, dated April 10, 2015 http://www.magzter.com/IN/Shrinikethan/Business-Advisor/Business/
How to Successfully Argue Wide Use Evidence in Trademark Opposition and Cance...KENFOX IP & Law Office
Trademark opposition and cancellation serve as crucial legal remedies for legitimate trademark owners to safeguard their intellectual property rights. In Vietnam, genuine trademark owners are entitled to employ their prior evidence of wide use to file a Notice of Opposition or a cancellation action against a trademark squatter. As such, it is critical to understand how National Office of Intellectual Property of Vietnam (IP VIETNAM) evaluates the evidence of prior use and the extent to which a mark must be used to succeed in an opposition or cancellation based on unregistered rights.
Acusação da SEC para a Pirâmide Financeira Wings NetworkGonçalo Silva
This document is a complaint filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission against Tropikgadget FZE, Tropikgadget Unipessoal LDA, and 15 individuals. The SEC alleges that the defendants operated a fraudulent Ponzi and pyramid scheme through a multi-level marketing company called Wings Network. While representing that Wings Network sold digital and mobile products, the SEC claims it primarily used money from new investors to pay earlier investors with little revenue from actual product sales. The SEC is seeking emergency relief including asset freezes and injunctions to halt the alleged ongoing violations and preserve assets for defrauded investors.
This document summarizes several recent Malaysian tax cases from 2018. It discusses cases related to withholding tax, reinvestment allowance, income tax act, real property gain tax, industrial building allowance, and sales and service tax. For each case, it outlines the key issues, facts, and decisions of the court. The document is a copyrighted presentation by KTP & THK and readers are advised to seek professional tax advice.
The document provides summaries of several SAT orders and exemption orders related to legal matters heard by SEBI.
The first case summary describes a SAT order that reduced a penalty on Vitro Commodities Private Limited from Rs. 10 lakhs to Rs. 1 lakh for failing to disclose acquiring over 5% shareholding in a company in violation of takeover regulations. The SAT clarified the relevant regulations were not substantially different, so penalties for both violations were not justified.
The second summary involves a SAT appeal regarding an SEBI observation letter directing appellants to revise an open offer price based on prior share acquisitions. The SAT allowed the appeal, finding the letter could be challenged and that determining regulation violations requires
Studio 417 inc. v. the cincinnati insuranceBolinLawGroup
This order denies the defendant insurance company's motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs, who are businesses that own restaurants and hair salons, filed a lawsuit against their insurance provider seeking coverage for losses they incurred when the businesses were forced to close due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The defendant argued that the insurance policies required "physical loss or damage" and that COVID-19 does not cause such physical alterations. However, the court found that the policies do not define "physical loss" and its plain meaning could include loss of use, which the plaintiffs allegedly experienced when they were prohibited from operating their businesses. Therefore, the plaintiffs adequately stated claims under the various coverage provisions of the policies, and the defendant's motion to dismiss was denied.
Safeguard Mechanism in Jordan by Bashar H MalkawiBashar H Malkawi
The WTO Agreement on Safeguards prescribes each member to adopt appropriate domestic legislation before it imposes safeguard measures. Historically, Jordan enacted its first WTO-compatible safeguard law, known as the National Production Protection Law No.4 of 1998 (“NPP Law”), in 1998 on the eve of Jordan’s accession to the WTO. Afterward, it amended its NPP Law of 1998. So now, Jordan’s safeguard system is based on the amended NPP Law No. 50 of 2002 and Regulation on Safeguard of National Production. The article also examines safeguard measures under the U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement.
This document summarizes a research essay about the case of Industrias Ceresita S.A., the first company prosecuted under Chile's Law 20,393 on criminal liability of legal persons. The essay describes how Industrias Ceresita paid a municipal official a bribe to obtain a permit, in violation of the law. It then discusses the agreement reached between the company and prosecutors, where the company's proceedings were conditionally suspended for two years subject to implementing compliance programs and donating land and resources to the community. The essay aims to analyze this implications of this landmark case in the context of OECD and Chilean policies on combating foreign bribery.
Vietnam's 2022 amended IP Law - What do new trademark provisions mean for you...KENFOX IP & Law Office
Intellectual property is regarded as a company's most important and valuable asset. In particular, it cannot be denied that a trademark is the industrial property object with the highest commercial exploitation value. Numerous amendments and additions have been made to Vietnam's 2022 Intellectual Property Law in order to improve the effectiveness of the intellectual property protection mechanism and fulfill Vietnam's legal obligations under International intellectual property agreements to which Vietnam is a signatory, including CPTPP, EVFTA, and RCEP... These amendments and supplements are akin to a complete overhaul of Vietnam's intellectual property law, helping to address legal loopholes that have persisted for many years since the 2005 IP law was promulgated and amended in 2009 and 2019. The following article gives an analysis and evaluation of the revised trademark regulations in the 2022 IP Law, assisting you in comprehending the applicable legislation to determine the appropriate actions, and the impact on your brand protection strategy in Vietnam.
This SEC complaint alleges that Stephen Burns, former CEO of electric vehicle company Lordstown Motors, made negligent and materially inaccurate statements about pre-orders for Lordstown's pickup truck. Specifically, Lordstown claimed to have over 27,000 pre-orders from commercial fleets based on non-binding letters of intent, but the company had no effective processes for vetting customers or tracking pre-orders. The SEC alleges Burns' statements about pre-orders created an unrealistic depiction of demand in violation of securities laws.
The document is a letter from Nathan Anderson to the Board of Directors, Executives and Auditors of Tingo Group Inc. listing 38 questions regarding Tingo Group's business operations and financials. The questions raise serious doubts about the legitimacy of Tingo's reported revenues, customer and supplier relationships, licenses and permits. Key issues highlighted include a lack of evidence for Tingo's claimed cash balances, inventory, export volumes and mobile network operations.
1) Osirius Group LLC filed a complaint against Ideanomics Inc. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. Osirius provided engineering services to Via Motors from July 2022 to December 2022, invoicing Via Motors monthly. Via Motors failed to pay the invoices, owing Osirius over $2 million.
2) Ideanomics acquired Via Motors in January 2023 and had previously agreed to pay any remaining debt owed by Via Motors to Osirius. However, Ideanomics failed to pay the outstanding amount owed for Osirius' services.
3) Osirius is suing Ideanomics for breach of contract and
This 6-page legal document outlines the charges in a criminal case. It describes the defendant and their alleged crimes, which include wire fraud and aggravated identity theft. Further details are provided about the scheme, the victims impacted, and evidence collected. If convicted on all counts, the defendant faces a maximum penalty of 32 years in prison and $1 million in fines.
1) Acuitas Capital invested $20 million in Ideanomics in exchange for preferred stock and warrants that were convertible into Ideanomics common stock. However, Ideanomics has now refused to honor Acuitas Capital's requests to convert these securities, in breach of their agreement.
2) Ideanomics claims the investment agreement is "null and void" due to unrelated allegations against the CEO of Acuitas Capital, but these allegations do not excuse Ideanomics' contractual obligations.
3) Prompt relief is needed because Ideanomics has admitted it may not be able to continue as a going concern. Unless ordered to honor the conversion requests, the value of Acuitas Capital's remaining
This document outlines the terms and conditions of a private offering of $750 million in senior secured notes issued by Adani Green Energy Limited. The notes will pay 4.375% annual interest and mature in 2024. The notes are being offered only to qualified institutional buyers in the US and offshore purchasers in reliance on exemptions from securities registration laws. The notes will be listed on the Singapore Exchange and India INX and secured by certain assets of the issuer described in security documents. The proceeds are subject to restrictions on use and transfer.
This document is an annual return form for a private company limited by shares called Milestone Tradelinks Private Limited. It provides details about the company's registration, activities, shareholding, directors and key managerial personnel, meetings, and attendance of directors. Some key details include the company's registered office in Ahmedabad, its main business activity of wholesale trading, total paid up capital of Rs. 407,000, and that directors Rajesh Rameshchandra Vora and Manish Amrutlal Shah each hold 0 shares as of the financial year end.
The auditor's report provides an unmodified opinion on the financial statements of Pmc Projects (India) Private Limited for the period 01/04/2013 to 31/03/2014. The auditor found that the company has maintained proper records of fixed assets, inventories and loans. Internal control procedures for purchase, sale and fixed assets were adequate. The company has not accepted any deposits from the public. Statutory dues have generally been regularly paid, with no material disputed amounts. No frauds were reported during the period.
Chang Chien-Ting holds significant beneficial ownership in PMC Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd. through PMC Infra Limited, a company registered in Mauritius. Chang holds 100% of PMC Infra Limited and exercises his significant beneficial interest in PMC Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd. by virtue of shares held in PMC Infra Limited. He declares this significant beneficial ownership in PMC Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd. as required by Section 90(1) of the Companies Act of India. The declaration provides details of Chang such as his address, date of birth, occupation, and nationality. It specifies the nature of his indirect holding in PMC Projects (India) Pvt.
Adani Developers (later renamed Sunbourne) 2013 Annual Report.pdfHindenburg Research
The document is an auditor's report for Adani Developers Private Limited for the period of April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2012. The auditor gave an unqualified opinion and did not note any qualifications, reservations or adverse remarks. Specifically, the auditor stated that the company maintained proper records of fixed assets, conducted physical verification of inventories, and complied with statutory dues payments. The auditor also confirmed the company had an adequate internal control and internal audit system.
This document contains a list of orders from the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) and adjudication orders from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) related to various Adani group companies, primarily Adani Exports Limited. The orders range from 2008 to 2019 and include matters related to stock market manipulation and insider trading involving several individuals and brokerage firms.
Vinod Adani - The Man Behind The Adani Group’s Offshore Deals (Morning Contex...Hindenburg Research
Vinod Adani is the elder brother of Gautam Adani, Asia's second richest man. Vinod oversees many of the Adani group's offshore deals and structures through companies based in tax havens like Mauritius and Cyprus. He has been involved in major deals like the Ambuja Cements acquisition and Total's investment in Adani Green Energy. However, the Adani group has previously denied Vinod's involvement. Vinod uses complex offshore structures that allow deals to be carried out without following all Indian laws, potentially reducing taxes. There are also ongoing legal issues regarding accusations of money laundering through Vinod's offshore companies that supplied equipment to Adani Power projects in India.
Krunal Trade & Investment Pvt Ltd is a private limited company incorporated in Mauritius on October 4, 2005 as a global business company. The company's registered office is located at Trustlink House in Floreal, Mauritius. The current directors are Adani Vinod Shantilal, Caillou Louis Ricardo, Mittra Subir, and Ramsagur Shailend. Trustlink International Limited serves as the company secretary.
Gardenia Trade and Investment Ltd is a private limited company incorporated on February 2nd, 2021. It operates as a global business company with its registered office in Mauritius. The company has three directors: Agowun Nihad Mohammad Akram, Mittra Subir, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the company's management and secretarial services provider.
Birch Trade and Investment Ltd is a private limited company incorporated in Mauritius on October 19, 2021 as a global business company. The company has three directors: Agowun Nihad Mohammad Akram, Mittra Subir, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the company's management company and secretary.
Athena Trade and Investments Pvt Ltd is a private limited company incorporated in Mauritius on July 18, 2017 for global business. The company has three directors: Mittra Subir from Dubai, Seewooruttun Indranathsingh from Mauritius, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad from Mauritius. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the company's management and secretarial services provider.
Flourishing Trade and Investment Ltd is a private limited global business company incorporated on August 18, 2017 in Mauritius. The company has three directors - Mittra Subir, Seewooruttun Indranathsingh, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the company's management and secretary.
Delphinium Trade and Investment Ltd is a private limited company incorporated on February 2nd, 2021 in Mauritius for global business purposes. The company has three directors: Mittra Subir, Seewooruttun Indranathsingh, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the company's management company and secretary.
Dome Trade and Investment Ltd is a private limited company incorporated in Mauritius on August 18, 2017 as a global business company. It has 4 directors: Adani Vinod Shantilal, Agowun Nihad Mohammad Akram, Mittra Subir, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the company's management company and secretary, located at Level 6, Tower 1, NeXteracom Building in Ebene, Mauritius.
Endeavour Trade and Investment Ltd was incorporated on April 29, 2021 as a private limited company in Mauritius for global business. The company has 3 directors - Mittra Subir, Seewooruttun Indranathsingh, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the management company and secretary since the company's incorporation.
𝐔𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐢𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐄𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐲 𝐄𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐍𝐄𝐖𝐍𝐓𝐈𝐃𝐄’𝐬 𝐋𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐎𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬
Explore the details in our newly released product manual, which showcases NEWNTIDE's advanced heat pump technologies. Delve into our energy-efficient and eco-friendly solutions tailored for diverse global markets.
Storytelling is an incredibly valuable tool to share data and information. To get the most impact from stories there are a number of key ingredients. These are based on science and human nature. Using these elements in a story you can deliver information impactfully, ensure action and drive change.
Prescriptive analytics BA4206 Anna University PPTFreelance
Business analysis - Prescriptive analytics Introduction to Prescriptive analytics
Prescriptive Modeling
Non Linear Optimization
Demonstrating Business Performance Improvement
The Genesis of BriansClub.cm Famous Dark WEb PlatformSabaaSudozai
BriansClub.cm, a famous platform on the dark web, has become one of the most infamous carding marketplaces, specializing in the sale of stolen credit card data.
The Most Inspiring Entrepreneurs to Follow in 2024.pdfthesiliconleaders
In a world where the potential of youth innovation remains vastly untouched, there emerges a guiding light in the form of Norm Goldstein, the Founder and CEO of EduNetwork Partners. His dedication to this cause has earned him recognition as a Congressional Leadership Award recipient.
The APCO Geopolitical Radar - Q3 2024 The Global Operating Environment for Bu...APCO
The Radar reflects input from APCO’s teams located around the world. It distils a host of interconnected events and trends into insights to inform operational and strategic decisions. Issues covered in this edition include:
SATTA MATKA DPBOSS KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART KALYAN MATKA MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA TIPS SATTA MATKA MATKA COM MATKA PANA JODI TODAY BATTA SATKA MATKA PATTI JODI NUMBER MATKA RESULTS MATKA CHART MATKA JODI SATTA COM INDIA SATTA MATKA MATKA TIPS MATKA WAPKA ALL MATKA RESULT LIVE ONLINE MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA RESULT DPBOSS MATKA 143 MAIN MATKA KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART
Discover the Beauty and Functionality of The Expert Remodeling Serviceobriengroupinc04
Unlock your kitchen's true potential with expert remodeling services from O'Brien Group Inc. Transform your space into a functional, modern, and luxurious haven with their experienced professionals. From layout reconfiguration to high-end upgrades, they deliver stunning results tailored to your style and needs. Visit obriengroupinc.com to elevate your kitchen's beauty and functionality today.
Satta matka fixx jodi panna all market dpboss matka guessing fixx panna jodi kalyan and all market game liss cover now 420 matka office mumbai maharashtra india fixx jodi panna
Call me 9040963354
WhatsApp 9040963354
SATTA MATKA DPBOSS KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART KALYAN MATKA MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA TIPS SATTA MATKA MATKA COM MATKA PANA JODI TODAY BATTA SATKA MATKA PATTI JODI NUMBER MATKA RESULTS MATKA CHART MATKA JODI SATTA COM INDIA SATTA MATKA MATKA TIPS MATKA WAPKA ALL MATKA RESULT LIVE ONLINE MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA RESULT DPBOSS MATKA 143 MAIN MATKA KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART
NIMA2024 | De toegevoegde waarde van DEI en ESG in campagnes | Nathalie Lam |...BBPMedia1
Nathalie zal delen hoe DEI en ESG een fundamentele rol kunnen spelen in je merkstrategie en je de juiste aansluiting kan creëren met je doelgroep. Door middel van voorbeelden en simpele handvatten toont ze hoe dit in jouw organisatie toegepast kan worden.
Call8328958814 satta matka Kalyan result satta guessing➑➌➋➑➒➎➑➑➊➍
Satta Matka Kalyan Main Mumbai Fastest Results
Satta Matka ❋ Sattamatka ❋ New Mumbai Ratan Satta Matka ❋ Fast Matka ❋ Milan Market ❋ Kalyan Matka Results ❋ Satta Game ❋ Matka Game ❋ Satta Matka ❋ Kalyan Satta Matka ❋ Mumbai Main ❋ Online Matka Results ❋ Satta Matka Tips ❋ Milan Chart ❋ Satta Matka Boss❋ New Star Day ❋ Satta King ❋ Live Satta Matka Results ❋ Satta Matka Company ❋ Indian Matka ❋ Satta Matka 143❋ Kalyan Night Matka..
❼❷⓿❺❻❷❽❷❼❽ Dpboss Matka Result Satta Matka Guessing Satta Fix jodi Kalyan Final ank Satta Matka Dpbos Final ank Satta Matta Matka 143 Kalyan Matka Guessing Final Matka Final ank Today Matka 420 Satta Batta Satta 143 Kalyan Chart Main Bazar Chart vip Matka Guessing Dpboss 143 Guessing Kalyan night
1. MARK A. LARSEN mlarsen@larsenrico.com (3727)
LISA C. RICO lrico@larsenrico.com (8901)
LARSEN CHRISTENSEN & RICO, PLLC
Attorneys for Plaintiff Infusive Technologies, LLC
50 West 300 South, Suite 400
Salt Lake City, Utah 84101
Telephone: (801) 364-6500
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
INFUSIVE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SAGENT HOLDING CO.,
Defendant.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Case No. 1:10-cv-00220-BCW
COMPLAINT and JURY DEMAND
Judge Brooke C. Wells
Filed Electronically
Plaintiff Infusive Technologies, LLC, alleges as follows:
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Infusive Technologies, LLC (“Infusive”), is a limited liability company,
organized and existing under the laws of the State of Nevada, with its principal place of
business in Bountiful, Utah.
2. Defendant Sagent Holding Co. (“Sagent”) is a corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of the Cayman Islands, with its principal place of business in
Schaumburg, Illinois.
JURISDICTION & VENUE
3. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Sagent pursuant to Utah Code Ann.
§§ 78-27-22 and 78-27-24 because Sagent subjected itself to the general jurisdiction of
Case 1:10-cv-00220-TC Document 2 Filed 01/03/11 Page 1 of 11
2. -2-
this Court, having conducted business in the State of Utah or having caused injury in the
State of Utah.
4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) because the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of
interest and costs, and is between citizens of different states.
5. Venue of this matter is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(2).
BACKGROUND
6. By September of 2008, Infusive developed and patented syringe-based
devices or other infusion therapy related products or devices, including U.S. Patent Nos.
6,997,910 (“the ‘910 patent”) 7,048,720 (“the ‘720 patent”) and 7,101,354 (“the ‘354
patent”). Infusive also had other patents pending, both in the United States and in foreign
countries.
7. Sagent is a pharmaceutical company primarily focused on generic injectable
products. Sagent offers its customers a broad range of pharmaceutical products across
anti-infective, oncolytic and critical care indications in a variety of forms, including single-
and multi-dose vials, and prefilled ready-to-use syringes and premix bags.
8. In September of 2008, Infusive and Sagent entered into an Asset Acquisition
Agreement. Among other things, the Asset Acquisition Agreement transferred to Sagent
the ‘910 patent, the ‘720 patent and the ‘354 patent.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Breach of the Asset Acquisition Agreement)
9. Infusive incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 8, inclusive, of this
Complaint.
Case 1:10-cv-00220-TC Document 2 Filed 01/03/11 Page 2 of 11
3. -3-
10. Infusive fully performed all of its obligations set forth in the Asset Acquisition
Agreement.
11. Paragraph 7.1 of the Asset Acquisition Agreement states:
After the Effective Date, Sagent shall own any and all Patent Rights,
Technology Rights, and Technical Information, whether first
conceived or discovered by either Infusive or Sagent or jointly, or by
their respective employees or agents.
12. Paragraph 4.1 of the Asset Acquisition Agreement states:
Upon the Effective Date, Sagent shall assume full responsibility for
the research and development related to the Patented Products and
use reasonable commercial efforts to develop and commercialize the
Patented Products.
13. Although “Reasonable Commercial Efforts” is a defined term in the Asset
Acquisition Agreement (Paragraph 1.8), it is not used as a defined term in Paragraph 4.1
of the Asset Acquisition Agreement. When used as a defined term, reasonable
commercial efforts is in initial capitals. See, e.g., Paragraph 11.3.
14. Under the terms of the Asset Acquisition Agreement, therefore, Sagent
assumed full responsibility for the research and development related to the Patented
Products, the development and commercialization of the Patented Products.
15. Paragraph 4.2 of the Asset Acquisition Agreement states:
Sagent shall be responsible for all design verification, design
validation, regulatory submissions and activities, marketing, launch
and sale activities, related to the Patented Products.
16. Under the terms of the Asset Acquisition Agreement, therefore, Sagent also
solely was responsible for all design verification, design validation, regulatory submissions
and activities, marketing, launch and sale activities, related to the Patented Products.
Case 1:10-cv-00220-TC Document 2 Filed 01/03/11 Page 3 of 11
4. -4-
17. Sagent failed to use reasonable commercial efforts to develop and
commercialize the Patented Products.
18. As a result of Sagent’s failure to use reasonable commercial efforts to
develop and commercialize the Patented Products, the Approval of the 510k for the first
product application of the Patented Products was not obtained.
19. A pertinent part of Paragraph 3.1 of the Asset Acquisition Agreement states:
Sagent shall remit or allow the following payments to or for the benefit
of Infusive:
a) One million two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($1,250,000)
within five (5) days after the Effective Date, …
b) One million dollars ($1,250,000) within ten (10) days after the
Approval of the 510k for the first product application of the
Patented Products (the payments described in Section 3.1(a)
and (b), are collectively referred to as the (“Assignment
Payments”). Sagent agrees to file the 510k with the
appropriate administrative agencies for the first product
application of the Patented Products no later than five
business days after this Agreement is executed by the Parties.
If the 510k is not filed within said five business day period then
the Assignment Paymentreferenced in this Section 3.1(b) shall
be due and payable in full no later than the earlier of the (i)
December 15, 2008 or (ii) upon Approval of the 510k for the
first product application of the Patented Products.
. . . .
20. As a result of Sagent’s failure to use reasonable commercial efforts to
develop and commercialize the Patented Products, and obtain the Approval of the 510k
for the first product application of the Patented Products, Sagent avoided paying the
Assignment Payment to Infusive of $1,250,000. If Sagent had used reasonable
commercial efforts to develop and commercialize the Patented Products, and obtain the
Approval of the 510k for the first product application of the Patented Products, the
Case 1:10-cv-00220-TC Document 2 Filed 01/03/11 Page 4 of 11
5. -5-
Assignment Payment to Infusive of $1,250,000 would have become due no less than six
months ago.
21. The Asset Acquisition Agreement also contains the following relevant
provisions, among others:
(a) A pertinent part of Paragraph 2.1 of the Asset Acquisition Agreement states:
Until the date on which Sagent remits payment up to the amount of
two million five thousand dollars ($2,500,000) pursuant to Section
3.1(a) and (b) hereinbelow (the “Transfer Date”), Infusive shall retain
a lien against the Assignment. . . .
(b) A pertinent part of Paragraph 2.2 of the Asset Acquisition Agreement states:
To secure the payment of the Assignment Payments (defined below),
Sagent hereby grants a security interest to Infusive, its successors
and assigns, in the Patent Rights, Technical Information and
Technology Rights (the “Collateral”). If Sagent does not pay the
Assignment Payments to Infusive when due, then, upon written notice
from Infusive to Sagent and Sagent’s failure to pay the amount owing
within ten (10) days after such notice, Sagent shall assign all right,
title and interest in and to the Collateral to Infusive free and clear of
any claims from Sagent or otherwise. . . .
22. A pertinent part of Paragraph 11.2 of the Asset Acquisition Agreement states:
In the event this Agreement is terminated by Sagent pursuant to
Section 11.1, Sagent shall assign to Infusive all right, title and interest
in and to the Patent Rights, Technical Rights, Technical Information,
and related proprietary information. . . .
23. Sagent claims to have terminated the Asset Acquisition Agreement.
24. Because Sagent did not paythe Assignment Payments to Infusive when due,
on November 18, 2010, counsel for Infusive demanded in writing that Sagent pay the
amount owing within ten days after such notice and demanded that Sagent assign all right,
title and interest in and to the Collateral – the ‘910 patent, the ‘720 patent and the ‘354
patent – to Infusive free and clear of any claims from Sagent. Despite such notice, Sagent
Case 1:10-cv-00220-TC Document 2 Filed 01/03/11 Page 5 of 11
6. -6-
did not pay the amounts due and did not assign all right, title and interest in and to the
Collateral to Infusive free and clear of any claims from Sagent.
25. Sagent’s failure to pay the Assignment Payments to Infusive constitutes a
breach of the Asset Acquisition Agreement, damaging Infusive in the sum of $1,250,000,
plus interest.
26. Further, Sagent’s failure to use reasonable commercial efforts to develop and
commercialize the Patented Products, including its failure to fund and pursue all design
verification, design validation, regulatorysubmissions and activities, marketing, launch and
sale activities, related to the Patented Products, constitutes a breach of the Asset
Acquisition Agreement.
27. Additionally, Sagent’s failure to obtain the Approval of the 510k for the first
product application of the Patented Products, including its failure to fund and pursue all
design verification, design validation, regulatory submissions and activities, relating to the
Patented Products, constitutes a breach of the Asset Acquisition Agreement.
28. If Sagent had not breached the Asset Acquisition Agreement in these, and
other ways, Infusive would have received Commercialization Payments in the minimum
amount of at least $2,000,000 per year for the remaining life of the ‘910 patent, the ‘720
patent and the ‘354 patent. The present value of these payments, the past and future
damage, is at least $15,000,000.
29. As a result of Sagent’s multiple breaches of the Asset Acquisition Agreement,
Infusive has been damaged in a sum of at least $15,000,000, plus interest.
Case 1:10-cv-00220-TC Document 2 Filed 01/03/11 Page 6 of 11
7. -7-
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing)
30. Infusive incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 29, inclusive, of this
Complaint.
31. Sagent breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing implied in every
contract under Utah law. The breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing is not limited
to the express terms of the Asset Acquisition Agreement. It is fundamental that every
contract imposes a duty on the parties to exercise their contractual rights and perform their
contractual obligations reasonably and in good faith.
32. Even though the express terms of a contractual provision may appear to
permit unreasonable actions, the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing limits the
parties’ ability to act unreasonably in contravention of the other party’s reasonable
expectations.
33. Sagent breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing found in the
Asset Acquisition Agreement by exercising its discretion in contravention of Infusive’s
reasonable expectations.
34. Sagent exercised its discretion in contravention of Infusive’s reasonable
expectations in the following ways, among others:
A. Sagent failed to use reasonable commercial efforts to develop and
commercialize the Patented Products. Sagent failed to devote sufficient
resources to properly develop and commercialize the Patented Products.
Case 1:10-cv-00220-TC Document 2 Filed 01/03/11 Page 7 of 11
8. -8-
B. As a result of Sagent’s failure to use reasonable commercial efforts to
develop and commercialize the Patented Products, the Approval of the 510k
for the first product application of the Patented Products was not obtained.
C. As a result of Sagent’s failure to use reasonable commercial efforts to
develop and commercialize the Patented Products, and obtain the Approval
of the 510k for the first product application of the Patented Products, Sagent
avoided paying the Assignment Payment to Infusive of $1,250,000. If
Sagent had used reasonable commercial efforts to develop and
commercialize the Patented Products, and obtain the Approval of the 510k
for the first product application of the Patented Products, the Assignment
Payment to Infusive of $1,250,000 would have become due no less than six
months ago.
D. Sagent failed to devote sufficient resources to properly develop and
commercialize the Patented Products to avoid having to pay the Assignment
Payment to Infusive of $1,250,000.
E. Further, Sagent’s failure to use reasonable commercial efforts to develop
and commercialize the Patented Products, including its failure to fund and
pursue all design verification, design validation, regulatory submissions and
activities, marketing, launch and sale activities, related to the Patented
Products, constitutes a breach of the Asset Acquisition Agreement.
F. Additionally, Sagent’s failure to obtain the Approval of the 510k for the first
product application of the Patented Products, including its failure to fund and
pursue all design verification, design validation, regulatory submissions and
Case 1:10-cv-00220-TC Document 2 Filed 01/03/11 Page 8 of 11
9. -9-
activities, relating to the Patented Products, constitutes a breach of the
covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
G. Sagent failed to devote sufficient resources to properly develop and
commercialize the Patented Products to avoid having to pay the
Commercialization Payments to Infusive of at least $2,000,000 a year.
35. Sagent did not pay the Assignment Payments to Infusive, which constitutes
a breach of the Asset Acquisition Agreement, damaging Infusive in the sum of $1,250,000,
plus interest.
36. If Sagent had not breached the Asset Acquisition Agreement in these, and
other ways, Infusive would have received Commercialzation Payments in the minimum
amount of $2,000,000 per year for the remaining life of the ‘910 patent, the ‘720 patent
and the ‘354 patent. The present value of these payments, the past and future damage,
is at least $15,000,000.
37. As a result of Sagent’s multiple breaches of the Asset Acquisition Agreement,
Infusive has been damaged in a sum of at least $15,000,000, plus interest.
38. Paragraph 13.10 of the Asset Acquisition Agreement states: “This Agreement
shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Nevada.”
39. Through these acts and others, Sagent intentionally or recklessly breached
the covenant of good faith and fair dealing found in the Asset Acquisition Agreement in
complete disregard of Infusive’s property interests.
40. As a result, under Nevada law, Infusive is entitled to punitive damages
against Sagent in the amount of at least $50,000,000, or such other amount as may be
proven at trial.
Case 1:10-cv-00220-TC Document 2 Filed 01/03/11 Page 9 of 11
10. -10-
WHEREFORE, Infusive requests judgment against Sagent as follows:
A. On the First Claim for Relief, for a judgment in favor of Infusive and against
Sagent for compensatory damages in the sum of at least $15,000,000, plus
interest, or such other amount as may be proven at trial.
B. On the Second Claim for Relief, for a judgment in favor of Infusive and
against Sagent for compensatory damages in the sum of at least
$15,000,000, plus interest, or such other amount as may be proven at trial.
C. On the Second Claim for Relief, for a judgment in favor of Infusive and
against Sagent for punitive damages in the sum of at least $50,000,000, plus
interest, or such other amount as may be proven at trial.
D. On all Claims for Relief, for attorneys’ fees and costs in an amount to be
proven at trial.
E. On all Claims for Relief, for such other and further relief as the Court may
deem appropriate.
Case 1:10-cv-00220-TC Document 2 Filed 01/03/11 Page 10 of 11
11. -11-
JURY DEMAND
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38(b), Infusive demands a trial by jury of any issue
triable of right by jury and tendered the statutory jury fee upon the filing of this Complaint.
Dated: January 3, 2011.
LARSEN CHRISTENSEN & RICO, PLLC
/s/ Mark A. Larsen
________________________________
Mark A. Larsen
Attorneys for Plaintiff Infusive Technologies,LLC
Case 1:10-cv-00220-TC Document 2 Filed 01/03/11 Page 11 of 11