Supreme Court of Delaware

In a suit over the terms of a patent license agreement (PLA) between plaintiff and a third party, affecting the transfer of an interest in the patents to defendant, judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) defendant was not judicially estopped from changing its argument during trial about the relationship between two sections of the PLA; 2) the "law of the case" did not prevent defendant from changing its arguments on an earlier remand; and 3) there was sufficient evidence to support the trial court's findings of fact.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/08/2008
• Published 10/08/2008

Judges

• RIDGELY, Justice:, Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and RIDGELY, Justices.

Court

• Supreme Court of Delaware

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Jeffery L. Moyer, Esquire, of Richards, Layton and Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE and J. Timothy Eaton, Esquire, of Shefsky and Froelich, Ltd., Chicago IL, for Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Daniel V. Folt, Esquire and Matt Neiderman of Duane Morris, LLP, Wilmington, DE and Patrick J. Loftus, Esquire, Philadelphia, PA, for Appellee.