Two of three state law claims were dismissed. Discovery was stayed as to unjust enrichment
Knova Software, Inc. et al. v. Inquira, Inc., No. 067-381-JJF, Apr. 27, 2007.
Farnan, J. Defendant's motion to dismiss claims of intentional interference with prospective economic relationships and unfair competition was granted. Motion to dismiss unjust enrichment claim was denied.
Defendant is a primary competitor of plaintiff in the marketing and selling of knowledge management systems. Plaintiffs' complaint contained state law claims in addition to patent claims. The complaint was amended after a first motion to dismiss was filed and a second motion to dismiss was filed. The Court ruled that the intentional interference claims were preempted by federal patent law.
An unjust enrichment claim is not preempted when an incremental benefit is alleged beyond damages typically recoverable under patent law. Plaintiffs alleged that defendant received additional fees by bundling its infringing software with other services, such as maintenance and support.
It was unclear to the Court on the face of the complaint whether the remedy sought was an attempt to obtain a patent-like remedy and declined at this juncture to dismiss the claim. The Court stayed discovery on this issue and allowed defendant to renew the motion at the close of discovery.
A copy of the full opinion is available here.
