Indirect and joint infringement claims are dismissed
Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. Flo TV Inc., et al., Civ. No. 10-812-SLR, July 12, 2011.
Robinson, J. Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is granted in part and denied in part.
This is a patent infringement case filed September 23, 2010 by Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC seeking damages and injunctive relief against defendants regarding U.S. Patent No. 5,663,757, which is entitled “Software Controlled Multi-Mode Interactive TV Systems.” Defendants moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim, arguing, inter alia, that plaintiff’s second amended complaint fails to satisfy the pleading requirements for direct infringement, indirect infringement, and joint infringement. The motion was denied as to direct infringement because plaintiff’s allegations satisfy Fed. R. Civ. P. Form 18. However, the motion was granted as to indirect infringement because plaintiff “fail[ed] to allege sufficient facts that would allow the court to infer that defendants had any knowledge” of the patent-in-suit. Similarly, plaintiff’s joint infringement claim was dismissed because the “complaint does not provide specific facts explaining any alleged relationships among defendants . . . [and] [p]laintiff fail[ed] to identify any defendant as exercising ‘control or direction’ over the allegedly infringing acts of other parties.”
