Gibbons Law Alert

Gibbons Law Alert

Gibbons Law Alert Blog

Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd.: Should “Intent” Be Reconsidered in 271(e)(1)?

by

Posted in Customs / ITC / Patent / Pharmaceuticals

On April 9, 2024

Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., Appeal No. 22-1877 (Fed. Cir. March 25, 2024) Considerations of 271(e)(1), a 2-1 decision on appeal from a grant of summary judgement of non-infringement, addressed the question of whether 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1)’s safe harbor applies to the importation of two medical devices (transcatheter heart valve systems) into the U.S. for purposes of exhibiting the devices at a prominent medical conference that reported on the latest developments in cardiovascular medicine.

Sweeping Affordable Housing Reform Signed Into Law in New Jersey

by and

Posted in Affordable Housing / Environmental and Green Issues / Transactional Real Estate and Leasing

On March 25, 2024

On March 20, 2024, Governor Phil Murphy signed what could be the most significant and impactful affordable housing reform legislation in New Jersey since the original enactment of the Fair Housing Act (FHA) in 1985 in A4/S50 (the “Law”). After the New Jersey Supreme Court declared the Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) “moribund” in 2015, municipalities and developers, as well as interested advocacy groups, have been engaged in constitutional compliance litigation in an attempt to determine how best to create realistic opportunities for the construction of affordable housing. These various cases resulted in a large number of settlements across the state, with some very public and prolonged litigation still pending.

Refusal to Wear a Face Mask May Leave You Constitutionally Unprotected

by , and

Posted in Appellate / General Litigation

On February 29, 2024

Is there a constitutional free speech right to refuse to wear a face mask in public indoor spaces during a recognized public health emergency? The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently determined there is not, as part of a precedential decision in the consolidated cases of Falcone v. Dickstein, et al. and Murray-Nolan v. Rubin, et al. The Third Circuit addressed the First Amendment issue in the Murray-Nolan case. Specifically, the issue the court confronted was whether, during the COVID-19 pandemic, plaintiff Gwyneth Murray-Nolan, an “advocate for parental choice in masking children at school,” was protected under the First Amendment in her refusal to wear a mask during a Board of Education (“BOE”) meeting, despite the BOE’s mask requirement and the Governor’s Executive Order mandating that New Jersey schools require the use of face masks. (The Falcone case, though likewise arising from an individual’s opposition to a mandatory masking policy, was decided on different grounds.) The plaintiff’s refusal to wear a mask was intended by her as a silent protest against the BOE’s masking policy and its lack of action to unmask children in schools. While the court recognized that the First Amendment protects some conduct in some settings, the court held that the refusal to wear a mask failed to satisfy the constitutional standard...

Governor Murphy Proposes FY 2025 Budget Centered on Opportunity, Affordability, and Shared Responsibility in New Jersey

by

Posted in State Budget / State Government

On February 28, 2024

Yesterday afternoon, Governor Murphy presented his State FY 2025 Budget to a joint session of the Legislature in Trenton, New Jersey. The proposed budget totals $55.9 billion, keeping total spending growth below 1 percent from the FY 2024 adjusted appropriations ($55.43 billion). It includes a $6 billion surplus. The proposal does not include any new taxes but does include a new 2.5 percent corporate transit fee that will apply to many of the large businesses operating in New Jersey and other smaller revenue raisers (discussed below). The Governor’s budget address was centered around themes of opportunity and affordability. The budget proposal stressed that opportunity is available to all who call New Jersey home and those who may be newcomers to the State. Affordability/Property Tax Relief Governor Murphy addressed rising costs, supply chain snarls, and inflation in his address. The proposed budget aims to improve affordability in the State by addressing property taxes and increasing access to housing. The budget proposal includes $3.5 billion dollars directed toward property tax relief through programs such as the Affordable New Jersey Communities for Homeowners and Renters (ANCHOR) Property Tax Relief Program, which provides property tax rebates to both homeowners and tenants, and the Senior Freeze Program, which provides property tax relief to seniors and differently abled New Jerseyans. The...

NJ Appellate Division Holds That Residency of Party Making First Contact in Long-Term Business Relationship Is Not “Jurisdictionally Dispositive”

by

Posted in General Litigation

On February 28, 2024

Personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant cannot be based on the unilateral acts of an in-state plaintiff. Instead, a New Jersey court may assert jurisdiction over a defendant only if that defendant “reached out” to New Jersey in some meaningful way. Consequently, when an out-of-state defendant is sued by an in-state plaintiff alleging a breach of contract, the court will often look to see which party initiated the contractual relationship when deciding whether it has jurisdiction over the defendant. In a recent published opinion, however, the New Jersey Appellate Division clarified that, depending on the particular facts of a matter, jurisdiction may be asserted over an out-of-state defendant even when an in-state plaintiff initiated the relationship. In Allure Pet Products, LLC v. Donnelly Marketing & Development LLC , the plaintiff, a New Jersey-based supplier of pet products, telephoned the defendant, a Utah-based organizer of trade shows, in 2011 to request booth space for a biennial trade show planned for 2012. The agreement was consummated, and the plaintiff exhibited at the 2012 trade show. In 2013, the defendant mailed to the plaintiff a “special offer” to renew its booth space for the 2014 show. The plaintiff accepted the offer and exhibited at the 2014 show. The same pattern held for the 2016 and 2018 shows: The...

Safety First: Counsel Should Take Affirmative Steps to Ensure ESI Is Being Preserved

by

Posted in Legal Decisions & Court Rules

On February 26, 2024

In the advent of the 2015 amendment to Rule 37(e), courts have made clear that counsel’s obligation to ensure the preservation of ESI extends beyond the mere issuance of a litigation hold. Instead, to avoid possible sanctions, counsel must take affirmative steps to ensure the client’s compliance with the litigation hold to prevent the destruction of relevant ESI. In multidistrict litigation over a hazardous spill, In re Gold King Mine Release, defendant Harrison Western Construction Corporation (“Harrison”) was sanctioned for its failure to preserve and produce relevant documents related to its work on a Colorado mine prior to the release of millions of gallons of toxic waste. In its 2019 discovery requests, the state of Utah sought documents related to the work Harrison performed or planned to perform at the mine in 2014 and 2015. In response, Harrison was unable to provide most of the requested documents from that time period, claiming – through a third-party IT consultant – that a “catastrophic event” occurred during Harrison’s migration of documents to a new server. Because Harrison could not produce the requested documents, Utah moved for sanctions under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 37(b) and (e); however, the court seemingly only analyzed Utah’s application under Rule 37(e). In its analysis under Rule 37(e), the court focused on Harrison’s...

Unraveling Environmental Legal Complexities: Lessons from the Clarios Case and RIP Waivers

by

Posted in Transactional Real Estate and Leasing

On February 22, 2024

A recent February 5, 2024, decision by the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division delivered a significant blow to Clarios, LLC (Clarios), a car battery manufacturer facing environmental scrutiny at its New Brunswick plant. This recent decision has echoed through the environmental legal landscape, leaving companies contemplating the use of Remediation in Progress Waivers (RIP waivers) with critical questions and a renewed sense of caution. The case, far from offering definitive answers, instead highlights the intricate interplay between property rights, environmental stewardship, and the nuances of due process protections. Moreover, the court’s denial of Clarios’s request to postpone remediation has broader implications for scenarios involving joint liability agreements and property transactions, highlighting the complex challenges associated with RIP waivers. By dissecting the court’s reasoning and its implications, we gain valuable insights into the limitations and prudent utilization of RIP waivers, ensuring responsible environmental practices and mitigating unintended legal consequences. Decoding the Chain of Title of the RIP Waiver The complex history of the RIP waiver granted to Clarios in 2007 finds its roots in the ownership transition of the site. Delphi Automotive Systems, LLC (Delphi), the former owner, had been manufacturing automobile batteries at the location. In 2006, Delphi sold the property to Johnson Controls Battery Group, Inc., a corporate predecessor of Clarios, triggering a sequence of...

Gibbons to Present Live CLE Seminar: “Keys to Negotiating Better Software and Software-as-a-Service Agreements”

by

Posted in Software/SAAS

On February 1, 2024

From April 16-18, Peter J. Frazza, a Director in Gibbons’s Business & Commercial Litigation Group, will lead a seminar in Las Vegas analyzing the negotiation of software licenses and software-as-a-service agreements, addressing artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things (IoT), and data protection and privacy issues specific to software transactions. Mr. Frazza will leverage his 40+ years of experience handling complex lawsuits and contract negotiations on behalf of licensees and users, in order to provide a substantive, insightful overview and practical action steps to optimize your negotiation strategies in an ever-changing technology environment. This seminar is ideal for: Chief Information Officers Chief Technology Officers Chief Financial Officers Contract Negotiators In-House Counsel IT/IS/MIS Managers Contract Managers Contract Administrators Purchasing/Procurement Agents Consultants CLE INFORMATION New Jersey: Gibbons P.C. is an accredited MCLE provider in the State of New Jersey. This program has been approved by the Board on Continuing Legal Education of the Supreme Court of New Jersey for 18.0 hours of total CLE credit. Of these, 0 qualify as total hours of credit for Ethics and Professionalism, including 0 hours in diversity, inclusion, and elimination of bias, and 0 qualify as hours of credit toward certification in civil trial law, criminal trial law, workers compensation law, municipal court law, and/or matrimonial law. New York: Gibbons P.C. has been...

New Jersey’s Consumer Data Privacy Statute – What You Need to Know

by and

Posted in General Litigation

On January 31, 2024

On January 16, 2024, Governor Murphy signed S332 into law, making New Jersey the 13th state to enact legislation designed to protect the personal data of its residents. The law will become effective next year, on January 15, 2025, and imposes various obligations on a person or entity (designated as either a “controller” or a “processor”) that collects, discloses, processes, or sells the personal data of New Jersey consumers. The statute establishes various rights for New Jersey residents with respect to their own personal data and also provides consumers with the ability to opt out of disclosure and sale of their personal data in certain circumstances. Finally, the Division of Consumer Affairs has the authority to develop rules and regulations necessary to effectuate the purposes of the statute, and the Attorney General has sole and exclusive enforcement authority. The scope of S332 signed by the Governor was expanded significantly from prior versions. As late as December 17, 2023, the bill only applied to a person or entity that operated “any service provided over the Internet that collects and maintains personally identifiable information from a consumer.” The law enacted less than one month later, however, is not limited to collection of data over the internet; it applies to all “personal data” regardless of how it is...

Connect:

About Gibbons

With 200 attorneys, Gibbons is a leading law firm in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Washington, DC, and Florida, ranked among the nation’s top 200 by The American Lawyer. More…

Subscribe

Archived Blog Posts

Categories