Case Title: Huang et al. v. Fleischman

Citation: 

Docket Number: 439, 2007

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2007-09-10T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
JEN-HSUN HUANG, CHRIS A. 
MALACHOWSKY, JEFFREY D. 
FISHER, MARY DOTZ, CURTIS R. 
PRIEM, DI MA, TENCH COXE, 
JAMES C. GAITHER, HARVEY C. 
JONES, WILLIAM J. MILLER, MARK 
STEVENS, and BROOKE SEAWELL, 
 
Defendants Below- 
Appellants, 
 
and 
 
NVIDIA CORPORATION, a Delaware 
corporation, 
 
Nominal Defendant Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
IRVING FLEISCHMAN, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§ 
§  No. 439, 2007 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Court of Chancery 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  C.A. No. 2497 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
Submitted: September 4, 2007 
  Decided: September 10, 2007 
 
Before HOLLAND, BERGER, and JACOBS, Justices. 
 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 10th day of September 2007, it appears to the Court that: 
 
 
-2-
(1) 
The defendants below have petitioned this Court, pursuant to Supreme 
Court Rule 42, to accept an appeal from an interlocutory order of the Court of 
Chancery dated July 23, 2007.  The Court of Chancery’s order granted the 
plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery of certain reports relied upon by the 
defendants in their motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint. 
(2) 
Defendants filed their application for certification to take an 
interlocutory appeal in the Court on August 2, 2007.  The Court of Chancery 
denied the certification application on August 22, 2007. 
(3) 
Applications for interlocutory review are addressed to the sound 
discretion of this Court.  In the exercise of its discretion, this Court has concluded 
that the application for interlocutory review does not meet the requirements of 
Supreme Court Rule 42(b) and should be refused. 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the within 
interlocutory appeal is REFUSED.  The motion to stay is MOOT. 
BY THE COURT: 
 
/s/ Carolyn Berger 
Justice