Iqbal does not require increased pleading specificity in patent cases
Mark IV Industries Corp. v. Transcore, L.P., et al., C.A. No. 09-418-GMS, December 2, 2009.
Sleet, C. J. Defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and for bad faith and breach of a settlement agreement is denied.
The court concludes that the complaint contains sufficient specificity and declines to dismiss on that ground. It rejects the contention that the Supreme Court decision Ashcroft v. Iqbal heightened the requirements for pleading direct infringement. Rule 12(b) does not provide for a dismissal based on violation of a settlement agreement. In addition, both parties agreed that their actions to comply with the terms of the settlement agreement had been met. Bad faith motion is denied due to efforts to comply with agreement, dearth of authority provided, and the presumption in favor of good faith.
