Sri International Inc. v. Internet Security Systems, Inc., et al., Civ. No. 04-1199-SLR, October 31, 2011.
Robinson, J. In limine and Daubert motions are decided with mixed results before damages trial.
Continue Reading...Solvay, S.A. v. Honeywell Specialty Materials LLC, et al., Civ. No. 06-557-SLR, September 8, 2011.
Robinson, J. Motion to strike is denied. Daubert motion is granted in part and denied in part.
Continue Reading...S.O.I.TEC Silicon on Insulator Technologies, S.A. and Commissariat à L’Énergie Atomique v. MEMC Electronic Materials, Inc., Civ. No. 08-292-SLR, July 13, 2011.
Robinson, J. Post-trial motions are either denied or moot.
Continue Reading...LG Electronics U.S.A., et al. v. Whirlpool Corporation, et al., C. A. No. 08-234-GMS, July 1, 2011.
Sleet, C. J. Post-trial motions granted in part and denied in part.
Continue Reading...Energy Transportation Group, Inc. v. Sonic Innovations, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 05-422-GMS, June 7, 2011.
Sleet, C. J. Defendants’ motion for judgment as a matter of law of noninfringement and invalidity and for a new trial granted in part and denied in part. The jury’s finding of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents was reversed as to two claims of one of the patents-in-suit due to prosecution history estoppel. The jury’s finding of validity and infringement as to the other patent-in-suit was preserved. The defendants’ request for a new trial on the issues of infringement and invalidity was denied. Plaintiff’s motion for pre-judgment and post-judgment interest was granted. All other post-trial motions were denied.
Continue Reading...Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc., et al., C. A. No. 04-1371-LPS, January 18, 2011.
Stark, J. Defendant’s post-trial motion to amend findings of fact is denied; plaintiff’s motion to declare case exceptional and award attorneys’ fees and treble damages is granted in part and denied in part.
Continue Reading...Acceleron, LLC v. Hewlett-Packard Co. and Intel Corp., Civ. No. 10-128-SLR, December 16, 2010.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion to complete Rule 56(f) discovery is denied. Its motion to compel documents and testimony is also denied as moot.
Continue Reading...David John Carnivale v. Staub Design, LLC, John Staub, and David Staub, Civ. No. 08-764-SLR, December 13, 2010.
Robinson, J. Court rules on bad faith after bench trial.
Continue Reading...Laboratory Skin Care, Inc. and Zahra Mansouri v. Limited Brands, Inc. and Bath And Body Works, LLC, Civil Action No. 06-601-LPS, December 6, 2010.
Stark, J. Plaintiff’s motion to preclude is granted. Plaintiff’s motion to file a surreply is denied. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment under § 102(b) is denied. Remaining portions of defendants’ invalidity motion are denied. Defendants’ motion to bifurcate liability from damages and willfulness is granted.
Continue Reading...Masimo Corporation v. Phillips Electronics North America Corp., et al., Civil Action No.09-80-LPS-MPT, October 6, 2010.
Thynge, M. J. Defendant’s motion to bifurcate and stay damages is denied.
Continue Reading...Cordance Corporation v. Amazon Com., Inc., et al., Civil Action No.06-491a-MPT, July 23, 2010.
Thynge, M. J. Plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction after trial is denied.
Continue Reading...Tristrata Technology, Inc. v. Medical Skin Therapy Reserch, Inc., et al., Civil Action No.06-644-JJF, July 20, 2010.
Farnan, J. Plaintiff’s motion to compel Defendant’s responses to document requests is denied as moot. Plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment is granted.
Continue Reading...Andrew Paul Leonard v. Stemtech Health Sciences, Inc. and John Does 1-100, Civil Action No.08-67-JJF, July 16, 2010.
Farnan, J. Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery and motion for leave to file an amended complaint are granted. The court declines to award costs of bringing the motion.
Continue Reading...LG Display Co., LTD. v. AU Optronics Corporation, et al., Civil Action No.06-726-JJF and 07-357-JJF July 8, 2010.
Farnan, J. The Court awards damages against plaintiff for infringement together with prejudgment interest. Defendant’s request for attorneys’ fees is denied.
Continue Reading...McKesson Automation, Inc. v. Swisslog Italia S.P.A. and Translogic Corporation, Civ. No.06-028-SLR, May 18, 2010.
Robinson, J. The Court adopts the Magistrate’s recommendations in part and overrules in part as follows:
(1) denies defendant’s motion to dismiss
for lack of standing and grants plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on defendant’s lack of standing defense;
(2) denies defendant’s noninfringement motion;
(3) grants plaintiff’s motion re: no inequitable conduct;
(4) grants plaintiff’s motion re: validity and denies defendant’s invalidity motion;
(5) denies defendant’s motion re: no willfulness;
(6) denies plaintiff’s motion re: no patent misuse;
(7) grants plaintiff’s motion re: no unclean hands, waiver, laches and equitable estoppel and denies defendant’s re laches and estoppel;
(8) grants in part defendant’s motion re: failure to mark.
The court also adopts in part and overrules in part the recommended claim constructions, and denies defendant’s motion to reconsider the denial of its motion to exclude certain expert testimony.
Trueposition Inc. v. Andrew Corporation, Civ. No.05-747-SLR, May 4, 2010.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion for supplemental damages based on “previously undisclosed sales for pre-injunction activity and sanctions for post-injunction activity are denied.
Continue Reading...Arendi Holding Ltd. v. Microsoft Corporation, et al., Civ. No.09-119-LPS, March 22, 2010.
Stark, M. J. Magistrate recommends that defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted.
Continue Reading...Cordance Corporation v. Amazon.Com, Inc., Civil Action No.06-491-MPT, March 19, 2010.
Thynge, M. J. The Order to bifurcate remains in place and the Court adopts plaintiff’s proposed scheduling order on remaining issues.
Continue Reading...Callaway Golf Company v. Acushnet Company, Civ. No.06-091-SLR, March 3, 2010.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s renewed motion for summary judgment on anticipation is denied. Defendant’s Daubert motion is denied. Plaintiff’s motions in limine are granted, and defendants’ motions in limine are denied in part and granted in part. The court denies the motion to disqualify the damages expert Brian Napper. He is qualified and need only show with a reasonable probability that sales for which lost profits are sought would have been made.
Continue Reading...Cordis Corporation v. Boston Scientific Corporation, et al., Civ. No.03-27-SLR, January 28, 2010.
Robinson, J. The court rules on several pretrial evidentiary issues.
Continue Reading...IGT v. Bally Gaming International, Inc., et al., Civ. No. 06-282-SLR, December 22, 2009.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction is denied.
Continue Reading...St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants, Inc. v. Fuji Photo Film Co., Ltd., et al., Civ. Act. No. 03-241-JJF, November 19, 2009.
Farnan, J. Plaintiff’s Motion For New Trial On Damages Pursuant To Fed.R.Civ.P. 59, Or In The Alternative, Motion For Prejudgment And Post-Judgment Interest will be denied to the extent a new trial is sought and granted to the extent that prejudgment and post-judgment interest is sought. In addition, Plaintiff’s Motion For A New Trial On Infringement will be denied because the Court has not modified it claim construction. The Final Judgment Order in this case will be amended to reflect the Court's prejudgment and post-judgment interest rulings.
Continue Reading...Arendi Holding Ltd. v. Microsoft Corporation, et al., Civ. No. 09-119-JJF-LPS, November 4, 2009.
Stark, M. J. The court will enter a new scheduling order to accommodate new discovery needed on provisional damages. Discovery issues are resolved.
Continue Reading...Cordis Corporation v. Boston Scientific Corp. and Scimed Life Systems, Inc., Civ. No. 03-027-SLR, September 30, 2009.
Robinson, J. After remand following liability trial, the Court orders separate trials before different juries.
Continue Reading...The Dutch Branch of Streamserve Development AB v. Exstream Software, LLC and Hewlett-Packard Co., Civ. No. 08-343-SLR, August 26, 2009.
Robinson, J. The Court determines that bifurcation of damages and willfulness for both discovery and trial is appropriate over plaintiff’s challenge.
Continue Reading...Robert Bosch LLC v. Pylon Manufacturing Corp., Civ. No. 08-542-SLR, August 26, 2009.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion for bifurcation is granted.
Continue Reading...Cordance Corporation v. Amazon.Com, Inc. and Amazon Web Services, LLC, Civil Action No. 06-491a-MPT, July 28, 2009.
Thynge, M.J. Patent misuse shall be tried and determined by the Court and Plaintiff’s claim for damages of the patent-in-suit begins on the date of correction by the PTO.
Continue Reading...Cordance Corporation v. Amazon.Com, Inc. and Amazon Web Services, LLC, Civil Action No. 06-491-MPT, June 30, 2009.
Thynge, M. J. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on defendants’ prosecution laches defense is granted and defendants’ motion relating to this defense is denied. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment concerning Amazon’s patent misuse defense is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on a marking issue is denied. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on defendants’ § 288 defense is granted.
Continue Reading...Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. v. Saint-Gobain Ceramics & Plastics, Inc., Civ. No. 07-190-SLR, May 15 , 2009.
Robinson J. Defendant’s motion for judgment as a matter of law or for a new trial and remittitur is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff’s motion for prejudgment interest is granted.
Continue Reading...Trueposition Inc. v. Andrew Corporation, Civ. No. 05-747-SLR, April 30, 2009.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion for an accounting and entry of final judgment is granted. Plaintiff’s 60(b) motion for relief is granted. Defendant is required to remit additional infringement damages, pre- and post-judgment interest and punitive damages and fees and costs associated with these motions.
Continue Reading...Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor, et al., Civ. No. 04-1371-JJF, December 12, 2008.
Farnan, J. Court grants in part defendant’s Motion for Remitter [sic], Judgment as a Matter of Law, or, in the Alternative for a New Trial on Damages to the extent that it requests a remittitur enters order reducing the damages awarded by 82%.
Continue Reading...Honeywell International, Inc., et al. v. Universal Avionics Systems Corp., et al., C.A. No. 02-359-MPT, November 12, 2008.
Thynge, M.J. Defendants’ motion to preclude plaintiff from relitigating lost profits based on issue preclusion is granted. Defendant Universal’s motion to preclude lost profits based on double recovery, judicial estoppel and/or implied license is moot. Defendants’ motion for reconsideration is denied.
Continue Reading...Becton Dickinson and Company v. Tyco Healthcare Group LP, C.A. No. 02-1694a-GMS, October 29, 2008.
Sleet, C.J. Plaintiff’s post-trial motions for an award for damages and prejudgment interest is granted. Plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction is granted in part and denied in part.
Continue Reading...Cordis Corp. v. Medtronic Vascular, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 97-550-SLR (Consolidated); Boston Scientific Corporation, et al. v. Ethicon, Inc., et al. C.A. No. 98-19-SLR, September 15, 2008.
Robinson, J. Following decade-long litigation, the Court grants Cordis’ motion for entry of final judgment and denies BSC’s motion for new trial and Medtronic’s motion for JMOL on lost profit damages.
Continue Reading...TruePosition Inc. v. Andrew Corporation, C.A. No. 05-747-SLR, July 31, 2008.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion for JMOL or a new trial is denied. Damages awarded by jury of $45.3 million are remitted to $18.6 million. Plaintiff’s motion for enhanced damages due to willful infringement is granted in part. Damages are enhanced by 25% to $23,250,000. Plaintiff’s motion for attorneys’ fees is denied. Plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction is granted. Prejudgment interest on $18.6 million is awarded, compounded quarterly at the prime rate. Post-judgment interest on $18.6 million from 9/19/07 (the date of judgment) is awarded at a rate equal to the weekly average 1-year constant maturity Treasury yield, as published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the calendar week preceding.
Continue Reading...Callaway Golf Company v. Acushnet Company, C.A. No. 06-091-SLR, November 30, 2007.
Robinson, J. The court makes evidentiary rulings on issues raised at the pretrial conference.
Howard Hess Dental, et al., v. Dentsply International, Inc., C.A. Nos. 99-255-SLR and 01-267, September 26, 2007.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is denied. Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue is granted.
Continue Reading...Thynge, M.J. Plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss counterclaim based on failure to mark is granted. Plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss counterclaims based on laches is denied. Evidence of laches is relevant to willfulness and can be presented to the jury. A portion of the trial may be allocated to make a record for the Court on laches if there is additional evidence to be presented on laches.
Continue Reading...IMX, Inc. v. Lendingtree, LLC, No. 03-1067-SLR, Apr. 25, 2007.
Robinson, C.J. Motion for reconsideration of the denial of a permanent injunction based on newly identified evidence was granted in part.
Continue Reading...IMX, Inc. v. LendingTree, LLC, No. 03-1067-SLR, Jan. 10, 2007.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion for JMOL and new trial was denied. Plaintiff’s motion for enhanced damages was granted. Plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction was denied with leave to supplement briefing.
Continue Reading...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.
Robinson, J. Plaintiffs’ motion for entry of judgment was affirmed in part and denied in part. Plaintiffs requested prejudgment interest through the entry of judgment after appeal. Prejudgment interest was allowed only up to the date of the original district court judgment.
IMX, Inc. v. Lendingtree, LLC, No. 03-1067-SLR, Jan. 10, 2006.
Robinson, J. Motion for reconsideration denied regarding prior summary judgment ruling granting defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment limiting damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. Section 287(a).
Philips Electronics N. Am. Corp. et al. v. Contec Corp. et al., No. 02-123-KAJ, Jan. 9, 2006.
Jordan, J. Motion for summary judgment on liability of indirect infringement was granted; motion for summary judgment of inducement of infringement was denied as moot. A direct infringement claim was dismissed at the consent of the patentee. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment of noninfringement and failure to provide damages, as well as Plaintiff’s motion for fees and costs, were denied.
Enter keywords:
For more information concerning any of these cases, contact Mary Matterer at mmatterer@morrisjames.com or 302.888.6960
