§Why CasetextPricing

CoStar Realty Information, Inc. et al v. Mark Field, et al

REPLY to Response to Motion re MOTION to Seal CoStar's Opposition to Pathfinder's Motion for Attorneys Fees in Support of Pathfinder's Motion

8 Cited authorities

  1. Pierce v. Underwood

    487 U.S. 552 (1988)   Cited 9,210 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when Congress reenacts a statute without changing its language, and when there is no indication that “Congress thought it was doing anything ... except reenacting and making permanent” the earlier legislation, a court should not give weight to legislative history pertaining to the reenactment

  2. Decision Insights, Inc. v. Sentia Grp.

    311 F. App'x 586 (4th Cir. 2009)   Cited 73 times
    Dismissing certain parts of a trade secret claim for plaintiff's failure to identify the relevant portions of source code in a computer program which corresponded to its trade secret claim

  3. Tucker v. Ohtsu Tire & Rubber Co., Ltd.

    191 F.R.D. 495 (D. Md. 2000)   Cited 69 times
    Finding additional expert opinions should not be excluded when "counsel made no efforts to obtain additional discovery from" an expert who submitted an additional report

  4. Proa v. NRT Mid Atlantic, Inc.

    633 F. Supp. 2d 209 (D. Md. 2009)   Cited 15 times

    Civil Action No. AMD 05-2157. July 1, 2009. Clayborne E. Chavers, The Chavers Law Firm PC, Patrick J. Massari, Law Office of Patrick J. Massari, Washington, DC, Sheryl Satzberg Levy, William Thaddeus Coleman, HI, Berger and Montague PC, Philadelphia, PA, for Plaintiffs. Paul J. Kennedy, Erik Christian Johnson, Joseph P. Harkins, Steven E. Kaplan, Littler Mendelson PC, Washington, DC, Cristina M. Rodriguez, Bank of America, Charlotte, NC, for Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER ANDRE M. DAVIS

  5. St. Augustine High School v. Uw. at Lloyd's of London

    Civil Action WMN-08-CV-2518 (D. Md. Jan. 20, 2010)

    Civil Action WMN-08-CV-2518. January 20, 2010 MEMORANDUM WILLIAM NICKERSON, District Judge Before the Court is Defendants Waldorf Associates and Waldorf Risk Solutions, Inc.'s Motion in Limine or, in the Alternative, To Amend Scheduling Order to Allow Further Limited Fact Discovery. Paper No. 99. The motion is fully briefed. Upon review of the pleadings and the applicable case law, the Court determines that no hearing is necessary (Local Rule 105.6) and the Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order to

  6. Rule 6 - Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 6   Cited 50,129 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."

  7. Rule 16 - Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 16   Cited 34,667 times   53 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the sanctions authorized by Rule 37(b)

  8. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 22,753 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system