Case Name: Christopher PETERS, by his father and next friend Grady PETERS, and Grady Peters and Rosetta Peters, Individually, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED, Defendant Below, Appellee
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Delaware
Decision Date: 2013-01-08
Citations: 58 A.3d 414
Docket Number: No. 292, 2012
Parties: Christopher PETERS, by his father and next friend Grady PETERS, and Grady Peters and Rosetta Peters, Individually, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED, Defendant Below, Appellee.
Judges: Before HOLLAND, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices.
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 58
Pages: 414–414

Head Matter:
Christopher PETERS, by his father and next friend Grady PETERS, and Grady Peters and Rosetta Peters, Individually, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED, Defendant Below, Appellee.
No. 292, 2012.
Supreme Court of Delaware.
Submitted: Dec. 19, 2012.
Decided: Jan. 8, 2013.
Revised: Jan. 9, 2013.
Ian Connor Bifferato, Esquire (argued), David W. deBruin, Esquire, Thomas F. Driscoll, III, Esquire, J. Zachary Haupt, Esquire, Bifferato, LLC, Wilmington, Delaware; Attorneys for Appellants.
Katharine L. Mayer, Esquire (argued), McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, Delaware; Of Counsel: Mary A. Wells,
Esquire (argued), Marilyn S. Chappell, Esquire, Denver, Colorado; Attorneys for Appellee.
Before HOLLAND, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices.

Opinion:
JACOBS, Justice:
On this 8th day of January 2013, the Court has determined that the Superior Court order granting the motion to dismiss of Texas Instruments Incorporated, the defendant-below, appellee, should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons assigned by the Superior Court in its September 30, 2011 opinion. We also affirm the Superior Court order dated May 7, 2012 denying the motion for reargument of Peters, the plaintiffs-below, appellants.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgments of the Superi- or Court are AFFIRMED.