Declaratory Relief Clause Samples

Declaratory Relief. St. ▇▇▇ Minerals Corporation v. Allianz Insurance Company, et al Orange County Superior Court, California Case No. 697526 (suit for coverage for superfund sites)

Declaratory Relief. Assignor acknowledges that damages alone would not be an adequate remedy for the breach of any of the provisions of this Assignment. Accordingly, in addition to any other rights and remedies it may have, Assignee shall be entitled to obtain declaratory relief from a court of competent jurisdiction preventing or restricting the use of the Work by Assignor, or any other breach of this Assignment.

Declaratory Relief. These matters came on for a mandatory settlement conference before the H▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ L. ▇▇▇▇▇ on January 25, 2001. At that conference, the Parties reached a settlement and compromise of all the claims asserted in the complaint and cross-complaint, and entered that settlement and compromise on the record pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6.

Declaratory Relief. The enforcing Owner may bring suit for declaratory relief to determine the enforceability of any of the provisions of this Agreement.

Declaratory Relief. For purposes of this Settlement Agreement, the “Settlement Class” is defined as follows: Plaintiff and all individuals who, from January 1, 2023, through the date of preliminary approval, directly or indirectly applied for a job opening in the State of Washington through Defendant Sharp Electronics Corporation’s job application systems where the job posting did not disclose the wage scale or salary range, a general description of benefits, and/or other compensation for the position, including job postings for positions with Defendant Sharp Electronics Corporation, as well as positions with its affiliates, divisions, and subsidiaries (including Sharp Business Systems; Sharp Electronics Corporation, Device Division (SECD); Dynabook Americas, Inc.; and Sharp Laboratories of America).

Declaratory Relief. An order from a court sorting out the rights and legal obligations of the parties in the midst of an actual controversy. Diversity Jurisdiction – Federal courts’ right to hear lawsuits based upon non-federal claims; parties must be from different states and the amount in controversy over $50,000. Economic Espionage Act – A law making it a federal crime to steal a trade secret or to receive or possess trade secret information knowing that it is stolen. Evaluation Agreement – A contract in which one party promises to submit an idea and the other party promises to evaluate it. After the evaluation, the evaluator will either enter into an agreement to exploit the idea or promise not to use or disclose the idea. Fiduciary Relationship – When one person stands in a special relationship of trust, confidence or responsibility to another. Generally Known – Information is generally known if it has been published or publicly displayed or is commonly used within an industry. Improper Means – The illegal acquisition of trade secrets through theft, bribery, misrepresentation, breach or inducement of a breach of a duty to maintain secrecy or espionage through electronic or other means. Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine – Under this court-made rule, adopted by only a few courts, a court can stop an ex-employee from working for a competitor if the former employer shows that the employee will “inevitably disclose” trade secrets of the former employer. Injunction – A court order requiring that a party halt a particular activity. A court can issue an injunction at the end of a trial (a permanent injunction) or immediately, rather than wait for a trial (a preliminary injunction). Two factors are used when a court determines whether to grant a preliminary injunction: (1) Is the plaintiff (the party bringing the lawsuit) likely to succeed in the lawsuit? and (2) Will the plaintiff suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted? The plaintiff may seek a temporary restraining order, which lasts only a few days or weeks. A temporary restraining order may be granted without notice to the infringer if it appears that immediate damage will result-for example, that evidence will be destroyed. Jurisdiction – The authority of a court to hear a certain type of case. Know-How – A particular kind of technical knowledge that may not be confidential but that is needed to accomplish a task. License – A contract giving written permission to use an invention, creative work, trade secret o...

Declaratory Relief. On October 31, 2023, ARX filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Class Action Complaint pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) for lack of injury-in-fact, to which Plaintiff timely responded in opposition thereto on December 1, 2023.

Declaratory Relief. On November 21, 2022, ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ moved to voluntarily dismiss his case, which the Court signed on November 22, 2022. The same day as the November 22, 2022, dismissal, counsel for ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ filed similar claims on behalf of a new class representative, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇.

Declaratory Relief. (i) If a third party commences an action for declaratory relief or similar action against Banner attacking the applicability, validity or enforceability of any Intellectual Property relating to Product(s), Banner shall advise JDS as to the facts and circumstances surrounding the action. Banner shall defend said action and/or institute an infringement counterclaim against the third party if Banner determines it is legally advisable and commercially reasonable to do so (taking into account the likelihood of success and relative cost/benefits). However, should Banner decide not to defend said action and/or institute an infringement counterclaim against the third party, JDS may request Banner to undertake such action using counsel of Banner’s choice (after conferring with JDS) at JDS’s expense. Banner and JDS shall confer regarding strategy for any action or defense brought under this Section 12.4(b) but Banner shall be solely responsible for the management and control of such action. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this Section 12.4(b)(i) shall require JDS to participate or contribute to the cost of Banner’s Intellectual Property enforcement or defense efforts unless the third party’s legal action (if successful) or infringement directly and materially adversely impacts, or is reasonably likely to directly and materially adversely impact, sales of the Product(s) and, in all other declaratory judgment actions relating to the Banner Intellectual Property, Banner is free to defend suit (including asserting Banner Intellectual Property infringement as a counterclaim) on its own behalf, at its own cost, and without contribution or indemnification thereof by JDS. In this latter case, Banner shall retain for itself all awards paid by third parties (whether by settlement or otherwise) as a result of Banner’s enforcement efforts. (ii) Subject to Section 12.4(b)(i), the costs and expenses of any such defense and/or counterclaim by Banner (including reasonable fees and expenses of attorneys and other third parties) shall be treated in the same manner as patent enforcement expenses pursuant to Section 12.4(a)(ii). (iii) Each party shall execute all necessary and proper documents and take such actions as shall be reasonably requested by the other to defend said action and/or institute and prosecute such counterclaim, including being named as a co-plaintiff or co-defendant in the action and/or counterclaim if warranted, in accordance with the terms of this Sectio...