Court declines to rule patent was not anticipated.
Ampex Corp. v. Eastman Kodak Co. et al., No. 04-1373-KAJ, Nov. 2, 2006.
Jordan, J. Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment of no anticipation is denied.
Continue Reading...
No infringement in camera patent dispute
Ampex Corp. v. Eastman Kodak Co. et al., No. 04-1373-KAJ, Oct. 31, 2006.
Jordan, J. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment of non-infringement is granted.
Continue Reading...
Markman decision relating to a system for storing video images
Ampex Corp. v. Eastman Kodak Co. et al., No. 04-1373-KAJ, Oct. 26, 2006.
Jordan, J. This Markman decision addresses only those terms that appear to be dispositive of issues raised in pending motions.
Continue Reading...
Case transferred to Wisconsin where related litigation is pending
Alloc, Inc. et al. v. Unilin Décor N.V. et al., No. 03-253 (GMS), Oct. 26, 2006.
Sleet, J. Motion to transfer granted.
Continue Reading...
Over $2.5 in fees and expenses awarded to Patentee in exceptional case
Philips Electronics North America Corp. et al. v. Compo Micro Tech, Inc., et al., No. 02-123-KAJ, Oct. 23, 2006.
Jordan, J. The Court awarded $2,448,750 in attorneys fees and $285,690.44 in expenses. $2,515,514.90 in fees and $747,141.93 had been requested. Continue Reading...
Jordan, J. The Court awarded $2,448,750 in attorneys fees and $285,690.44 in expenses. $2,515,514.90 in fees and $747,141.93 had been requested. Continue Reading...
Summary judgment of non-infringement granted
LP Matthews, L.L.C. v. Bath & Body Works, Inc. et al., No. 04-1507-SLR, Oct. 19, 2006.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion based on infringement is denied. Defendants’ non-infringement motions are granted. Continue Reading...
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion based on infringement is denied. Defendants’ non-infringement motions are granted. Continue Reading...
Invalidity summary judgment motions denied; patent law experts precluded
LP Matthews, L.L.C. v. Bath & Body Works, Inc. et al., No. 04-1507-SLR, Oct. 19, 2006.
Robinson, J. Summary judgment motions based upon invalidity and inequitable conduct are denied. Patent law expert testimony is precluded. Testimony of liability expert will be permitted except expert will not be permitted to opine inconsistently with the court’s claim construction.
Continue Reading...
Court is unpersuaded by champetry argument
LP Matthews, L.L.C. v. Bath & Body Works, Inc. et al., No. 04-1507-SLR, Oct. 19, 2006.
Robinson, J. Defendants’ motions to dismiss for lack of standing and failure to join a party are denied. Defendant BBW’s motion for summary judgment based on misassignment of the patent to the Greenspan Company rather than The Greenspan Corporation was denied.
Continue Reading...
Court construes claims relating to skin care product
LP Matthews, L.L.C. v. Bath & Body Works, Inc. et al., No. 04-1507-SLR, Oct. 19, 2006.
Robinson, J. Markman ruling with respect to disputed language in two claims of one patent-in-suit.
Continue Reading...
Court construes claims found in patents relating to the monitoring and surveillance of computer networks for intrusion detection
SRI International Inc. v. Internet Security Systems, Inc. et al., No. 04-1199-SLR, Oct. 17, 2006.
Robinson, J. Claim construction provided for 22 terms found in 4 patents relating to relate to the monitoring and surveillance of computer networks for intrusion detection. Continue Reading...
Robinson, J. Claim construction provided for 22 terms found in 4 patents relating to relate to the monitoring and surveillance of computer networks for intrusion detection. Continue Reading...
Defendants prevail on invalidity arguments
SRI International Inc. v. Internet Security Systems, Inc. et al., No. 04-1199-SLR, Oct. 17, 2006.
Robinson, J. Defendants’ motions for summary judgment of invalidity are granted. Plaintiff’s motion regarding no anticipation is denied as moot. Defendants’ motion for failure to disclose best mode is denied as moot.
Continue Reading...
Motions for summary judgment of non-infringement granted in part and denied in part
SRI International Inc. v. Internet Security Systems, Inc. et al., No. 04-1199-SLR, Oct. 17, 2006.
Robinson, J. Symantec’s motions for non-infringement are granted in part and denied in part; Internet Securities Systems’ motion is denied. Continue Reading...
Robinson, J. Symantec’s motions for non-infringement are granted in part and denied in part; Internet Securities Systems’ motion is denied. Continue Reading...
"Advancis" mark cancelled as confusingly similar to "Aventis"
Sanofi-Aventis et al., v. Advancis Pharmaceutical Corp., No. 03-1083-SLR, Sept. 26, 2006.
Robinson, J. After a bench trial in May, 2005, the court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law and ruled in favor of Aventis in this trademark infringement action. The court will order a permanent injunction and cancellation of defendant’s trademark.
Threat against Chinese affiliate provided reasonable apprehension of suit by American company importing accused product
Positec USA Inc. et al. v. Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp., No. 05-890 GMS, Sept. 25, 2006.
Sleet, J. The court denied a motion to dismiss this declaratory judgment action alleged to be unripe due to no objectively reasonably apprehension of imminent suit.
No inequitable conduct found where withheld art was cumulative
Becton Dickinson and Co. v. Tyco Healthcare Group LP, No. 02-1694 GMS, Sept. 25, 2006.
Sleet, J. The court held a bench trial on inequitable conduct while jury deliberated on infringement and willfulness. After a willful infringement verdict, the court ruled that the patents were not unenforceable due to inequitable conduct.
Continue Reading...
Sleet, J. The court held a bench trial on inequitable conduct while jury deliberated on infringement and willfulness. After a willful infringement verdict, the court ruled that the patents were not unenforceable due to inequitable conduct.
Continue Reading...
A few in limine motions granted before jury trial; most denied
Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int’l, Inc., No. 04-1371–JJF Sept. 20, 2006.
Farnan, J. Court grants 3 of 19 motions in limine filed by defendants, and 1 1/2 out of 5 motions filed by plaintiff.
Declaratory judgment action dismissed as unripe
Angiodynamics v. Diomed Holdings, Inc., No. 06-02 –GMS Sept. 7, 2006.
Sleet, J. Declaratory judgment action was dismissed due to no justiciable controversy. A motion to amend the complaint was also denied as futile.
Continue Reading...
Sleet, J. Declaratory judgment action was dismissed due to no justiciable controversy. A motion to amend the complaint was also denied as futile.
Continue Reading...
Licensing dispute pursuant to European standard-setting procedures was remanded to Chancery Court
Nokia Corp. et al. v. Qualcom, Inc., No. 06-509-JJF, Aug. 29, 2006.
Farnan, J. Motion to remand to Chancery Court for interpretation of contractual agreements is granted in the absence of a substantial question of patent law.
Continue Reading...
Farnan, J. Motion to remand to Chancery Court for interpretation of contractual agreements is granted in the absence of a substantial question of patent law.
Continue Reading...
Pretrial rulings favor patentee after court adopts broader claim constructions
Pharmacia & Upjohn Co. v. Sicor Inc. et al., No. 04-833-KAJ, Aug. 17. 2006.
Jordan, J. The Court construed claims regarding patent disclosing a “sterile, pyrogen-free, ready-to-use solution of anthracycline glycoside” used for treating tumors. Defendants’ motions for summary judgment of non-infringement and invalidity for lack of written description were denied. The Court granted plaintiff’s motion regarding defendants’ anticipation defense, and denied defendants’ motion on anticipation. Plaintiff’s motion regarding defendants’ unclean hands defense was denied.
Novozymes' patent was found to be enforceable and infringed
Novozymes A/S v. Genencor International, Inc. et al., No 05-160-KAJ, Aug. 24, 2006.
Jordan, J. Defendants were found to infringe an enforceable patent relating to alpha-amylase enzymes after bench trial. A bench trial on willfulness and damages will follow. The 64-page opinion also addresses claim construction.
Subpoena quashed where former employees had already provided testimony
Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc., No. 04-1371-JJF, Aug. 24, 2006.
Farnan, J. The court quashed a third party subpoena of Intersil as cumulative to and duplicative of previous subpoenas issued to Intersil’s former employees. Non cumulative topics were held to be irrelevant to this lawsuit.
Continue Reading...
Farnan, J. The court quashed a third party subpoena of Intersil as cumulative to and duplicative of previous subpoenas issued to Intersil’s former employees. Non cumulative topics were held to be irrelevant to this lawsuit.
Continue Reading...
Untimely amendment allowed to assert prosecution laches defense, but not inequitable conduct
Inline Connection Corp. v. AOL Time Warner Inc., et al., Nos. 02-272-MPT and 02-477-MPT (consolidated), Aug. 23, 2006.
Thynge, M.J. The court granted defendants’ motion to amend their pleadings to assert prosecution laches defenses and counterclaims, and denied the motion with respect to three additional inequitable conduct allegations.
Continue Reading...
Thynge, M.J. The court granted defendants’ motion to amend their pleadings to assert prosecution laches defenses and counterclaims, and denied the motion with respect to three additional inequitable conduct allegations.
Continue Reading...
Jury verdict against ATMI stands and court denies JMOL and new trial application
Praxair, Inc. et al. v. ATMI, Inc. et al., No. 03-1158-SLR, Aug. 17, 2006
Robinson, J. Motion for judgment as a matter of law, or alternatively for a new trial, is denied. Defendant’s argument that no reasonable jury could have found that defendant’s products infringe was rejected. Expert’s unrebutted yet conclusory testimony failed to persuade the jury and does not meet the necessary clear and convincing standard. New trial unwarranted since excluded evidence resulted from trial by ambush tactics.
Continue Reading...
DJ count dismissed as unripe where accused product lacked FDA approval; stay granted pending reexamination
Abbott Diabetes Care, Inc. v. Dexcom, Inc., No. 05-590 GMS, Aug. 16, 2006.
Sleet, J. Motion to dismiss complaint is granted as to declaratory judgment count, and denied as to infringement count; motion to strike amended complaint is granted; and motion to stay pending reexamination is granted.
Continue Reading...
Sleet, J. Motion to dismiss complaint is granted as to declaratory judgment count, and denied as to infringement count; motion to strike amended complaint is granted; and motion to stay pending reexamination is granted.
Continue Reading...
Court construes 15 terms from five patents-in-suit
Affymetrix, Inc. v. Illumina, Inc., No. 04-901-JJF, Aug. 16, 2006.
Farnan, J. The court construed 15 terms after a Markman hearing on April 20, 2006.
Continue Reading...
Consulting agreement provided standing to bring suit
Affymetrix, Inc. v. Illumina, Inc., No. 04-901-JJF, Aug. 16, 2006.
Farnan, J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss count II relating to U.S. Patent No. 5,795,716 because of lack of title to the ‘716 patent and therefore lack of standing was denied.
Continue Reading...
Inequitable conduct relief denied in part and deferred in part pending additional proof as to intent
Praxair, Inc. et al. v. ATMI, Inc. et al., No. 03-1158-SLR, Aug. 17, 2006.
Robinson, J. The Court finds Defendant failed to prove inequitable conduct by clear and convincing evidence after a bench trial with respect to some art, but with respect to others, it deferred ruling pending additional proof as to intent. Trial testimony waived attorney client privilege with respect to communications between the attorney and the inventors, which will be reviewed in camera for evidence of intent.
Continue Reading...
Robinson, J. The Court finds Defendant failed to prove inequitable conduct by clear and convincing evidence after a bench trial with respect to some art, but with respect to others, it deferred ruling pending additional proof as to intent. Trial testimony waived attorney client privilege with respect to communications between the attorney and the inventors, which will be reviewed in camera for evidence of intent.
Continue Reading...
Plaintiff's DOE claims barred by prosecution history estoppel
Honeywell International, Inc. et al. v. Hamilton Sundstrand Corp., No. 99-309 (GMS), Aug. 14, 2006.
Sleet, J. After en banc remand, and two day bench trial the court holds that prosecution history estoppel bars plaintiff from asserting the doctrine of equivalents.
Continue Reading...
Sleet, J. After en banc remand, and two day bench trial the court holds that prosecution history estoppel bars plaintiff from asserting the doctrine of equivalents.
Continue Reading...
Stream of commerce insufficient basis for personal jurisdiction over foreign holding companies
Monsanto v. Syngenta Seeds, Inc. et al., No. 04-305-SLR, Aug. 4, 2006.
Robinson, J. Syngenta foreign holding companies’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction is granted. The disputed technology involves glyphosate-tolerant corn.
Continue Reading...
Seed, not its resistant trait, is protected by the Lanham Act
Monsanto v. Syngenta Seeds, Inc., et al., No. 04-305-SLR, Aug. 4, 2006.
Robinson, J. Syngenta’s motion to dismiss Monsanto’s counterclaims of reverse passing off and false advertising under the Lanham Act was granted. Syngenta’s motion to dismiss Monsanto’s counterclaim alleging violations of the Delaware Deceptive Trade Practices Act was denied. The disputed technology relates to glyphosate-tolerant corn.
Continue Reading...
Privilege not waived in asserting advice of counsel defense where documents were not disclosed to accused infringer
Affinion Net Patents, Inc. v. Maritz, Inc., No. 04-360-JJF, July 28, 2006.
Farnan, J. Patentee’s motion to compel two claims charts where privilege was waived due to advice-of-counsel defense was denied.
Continue Reading...
Evidentiary rulings after bench trial
Forest Laboratories, Inc. v. Ivex Pharmaceuticals, Inc., No. 03-891-JJF July 25, 2006.
Farnan, J. After a bench trial, the court sustained about 10 out of 30 evidentiary objections after post-trial briefing.
Continue Reading...
Transfer to forum where related litigation is ongoing granted
Cashedge, Inc. v. Yodlee, Inc., No. 06-170-JJF, July 19, 2006.
Farnan, J. Defendant’s motion to transfer to California where there is prior litigation over related technologies, although different patents, is granted.
Continue Reading...
Farnan, J. Defendant’s motion to transfer to California where there is prior litigation over related technologies, although different patents, is granted.
Continue Reading...
Wavier of privilege as a result of advice of counsel defense does not extend to all communications with trial counsel
Ampex Corp. v. Eastman Kodak Co., et al., No. 04-1373-KAJ, July 17, 2006.
Jordan, J. Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of privileged documents denied.
Continue Reading...
Judgment against generic pharmaceutical company IVAX after bench trial
Forest Laboratories, Inc., et al., v. IVAX Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al., No. 03-891-JJF; July 13, 2006.
Farnan, J. After 5-day bench trial, court finds defendants have not established that the patents-in-suit are invalid as anticipated, obvious, or impermissibly broadened upon reissue, nor that a patent is unenforceable for inequitable conduct.
Choice of Delaware forum outweighed interest in litigating in bankruptcy forum
Zoetics, Inc. et al., v. Yahoo!, Inc., No. 06-108-JJF, July 6, 2006.
Farnan, J. Motion to stay action and transfer is denied. Despite the fact that New York would be more convenient for the witnesses, and the bankruptcy proceedings were pending in New York, the plaintiff’s choice of forum was paramount.
Continue Reading...
ANDA filing held not to support claim of willful infringement
Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GMBH et al, v. Barr Laboratories, Inc. et al., No. 05-700-KAJ, July 6, 2006.
Jordan, J. Defendants’ motion for reconsideration of prior ruling denying motion to strike willfulness allegations is granted and exceptional case discovery is stayed.
Continue Reading...
Jordan, J. Defendants’ motion for reconsideration of prior ruling denying motion to strike willfulness allegations is granted and exceptional case discovery is stayed.
Continue Reading...
Claims relating to data networks are construed
Toshiba Corp. v. Juniper Networks, Inc., No. 03-1035-SLR, June 28, 2006.
Robinson, J. Claim construction opinion.
Continue Reading...
Apparatus claims held not indefinite and free of method-of-use limitations
Toshiba Corp. v. Juniper Networks, Inc., No. 03-1035-SLR, June 28, 2006.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment of invalidity is denied.
Continue Reading...
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment of invalidity is denied.
Continue Reading...
Trade secret count survives motion to dismiss
Mobius Management Systems, Inc. v. Acartus, Inc., No. 05-346-SLR, June 28, 2006.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion to strike, dismiss and stay amended complaint is denied.
Continue Reading...
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion to strike, dismiss and stay amended complaint is denied.
Continue Reading...
Plaintiff's choice of forum upheld despite suit with additional patents filed only hours later in another forum
Thales Airborne Systems S.A. et al. v. Universal Avionics Systems Corp., No. 05-853-SLR, June 21, 2006.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion to transfer is denied. A motion to enjoin a New Jersey suit with additional patents in dispute filed hours after the Delaware suit is granted with respect to patents already part of the Delaware action and denied with respect to patents first filed in New Jersey.
Narrow claims construction results in summary judgment of noninfringement
Ciba Specialty Chemicals Corp. v. Hercules Inc., et al., No. 04-293-KAJ, June 20, 2006.
Jordan, J. The court narrowly construes “cross-linking agent” and “microbead” based upon statements made during prosecution. Request for construction of other claims is denied without prejudice. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement due to the absence of a “cross-linking agent” and “microbead” in the accused product. is granted. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents is denied.
Plaintiff's choice of forum prevailed after transfer motion
Turn of the Century Solution, L.P. v. International Rectifier Corp., No. 05-816-SLR, June 15, 2006.
Robinson, J. Motion to transfer to California where breach of contract case relating to patents was filed was denied.
New Lanham Act claims added on eve of expert discovery claims permitted
Affinion Net Patents, Inc. v. Maritz, Inc., No. 04-360-JJF, June 8, 2006.
Farnan, J. Plaintiff’s motion to amend complaint to assert Lanham claims and to dismiss counterclaims based on testimony that accused product was never implemented was granted.
Continue Reading...
Farnan, J. Plaintiff’s motion to amend complaint to assert Lanham claims and to dismiss counterclaims based on testimony that accused product was never implemented was granted.
Continue Reading...
New trial and JMOL on infringement and invalidity were denied
Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. et al. v. Cordis Corp. et al., No. 03-283-SLR, June 15, 2006.
Robinson, J. Defendants’ motion for JMOL or new trial on infringement and invalidity is denied. Defendants’ motion to strike portions of plaintiffs’ reply brief is granted in part and denied in part. New arguments are stricken.
Continue Reading...
Robinson, J. Defendants’ motion for JMOL or new trial on infringement and invalidity is denied. Defendants’ motion to strike portions of plaintiffs’ reply brief is granted in part and denied in part. New arguments are stricken.
Continue Reading...
Court construes six terms after parties submitted twenty-two for construction
LG. Philips LCD Co. Ltd v. Tatung Co. et. al., No. 05-292-JJF, June 13, 2006.
Farnan, J. Claim construction provided relating to flat panel display screens and methods of manufacturing them that include electrostatic discharge guard rings to protect the active elements of the display from electrostatic discharge.
Continue Reading...
Farnan, J. Claim construction provided relating to flat panel display screens and methods of manufacturing them that include electrostatic discharge guard rings to protect the active elements of the display from electrostatic discharge.
Continue Reading...
Case remanded to Chancery Court after dismissal of Lanham Act claims
Crown Packaging Technology, Inc. v. Albermarle Corp., Inc., No. 05-892-JJF, June 8, 2006.
Farnan, J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss Lanham Act claims was granted. Supplemental state court claims were remanded to the Court of Chancery.
Continue Reading...
Farnan, J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss Lanham Act claims was granted. Supplemental state court claims were remanded to the Court of Chancery.
Continue Reading...