Magistrate recommends dismissal of inducement claims.

Pragmatus AV, LLC v. Yahoo! Inc., Civil Action No. 11-902-LPS-CJB, November 13, 2012.

Burke, M. J.  Magistrate recommends defendant’s motion to dismiss the first amended complaint be granted in part and denied in part.

Defendant claims plaintiff insufficiently plead claims of direct and indirect infringement.  The claim of “undivided” infringement is sufficiently alleged if it matches what is required by Form 18 of the Appendix of Forms of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.  Plaintiff alleges that defendant performs each step of the claimed methods by providing and conducting teleconferences through its Yahoo! Messenger teleconference service.  To the extent that a defendant asserts a direct infringement claim should be dismissed because the claim terms require joint infringement, and the resolution of the question depends on claim construction, the motion should typically be denied as premature.  With respect to induced and contributory infringement, defendant claims plaintiff has failed to adequately plead the requisite knowledge and intent.  There are not sufficient facts alleged to support the inference that defendant had pre-suit knowledge that its users’ actions constituted infringement, or that defendant intended its users to infringe.  Dismissal of the inducement claim is recommended.

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://depatentlaw.morrisjames.com/admin/trackback/290667
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?
Send To A Friend Use this form to send this entry to a friend via email.