Patent law experts are precluded from trial
Vanderbilt University v. ICOS Corporation, C.A. No. 05-506-SLR, December 20, 2007.
Robinson, J. The Court rules that the testimony of legal experts will not be permitted at trial.
Continue Reading...Claim construction provided only tentative until prayer conference
Nice Systems, Inc. et al. v. Witness Systems, Inc., C.A. No. 06-311-JJF, December 14, 2007.
Farnan, J. The court issues a Memorandum on Tentative Claim Construction.
Continue Reading...Sanctions imposed due to contact with employee of opposing party's affiliate
Microsoft Corp. v. Alcatel Business Systems et al., C.A. No. 07-090-SLR, December 18, 2007.
Robinson, J. Motion to disqualify law firm is granted in part and denied in part.
Experts' testimony is limited in golf ball case
Callaway Golf Company v. Acushnet Company, C.A. No. 06-091-SLR, November 20, 2007.
Robinson, J. The Court grants plaintiff’s Daubert motion. Defendant’s motion to exclude plaintiff’s expert is granted in part.
Defendant is enjoined from marketing its DHA products
Martek Biosciences Corporation v. Nutrinova Inc., et al., C.A. No. 03-896-GMS, October 30, 2007.
Sleet, C.J. The court denies defendant’s motions for JMOL of noninfringement of one patent and invalidity of a second patent . It granted in part JMOL of invalidity of a third patent. It further grants plaintiff’s motion for JMOL of infringement of the first patent and for a permanent injunction.
Court limits expert testimony in Daubert rulings
TruePosition, Inc. v. Andrew Corporation, C.A. No. 05-747-SLR, August 23, 2007.
Robinson, J. The Court grants two Daubert motions and denies third without prejudice. Fourth Daubert motion is unopposed.
Continue Reading...Claim construction rehash resulted in non-infringement ruling in telecommunications case
Telecordia Technologies, Inc. v. Lucent Technologies, Inc., Nos. 04-875-GMS, 04-876-GMS, May 1, 2007.
Sleet, J. Summary judgment of non-infringement was granted with respect to the '306 patent and denied as to a second patent. Plaintiff's motion that the '306 patent was not anticipated was granted in part. Plaintiff's motion that the '306 patent was not invalid due to lack of enablement was granted. Defendant's motion for summary judgment of invalidity of the '306 patent for failure to disclose the best mode was denied.
Continue Reading...
Summary judgment of non-infringement in stent case was granted.
Robinson, C.J. Cordis’ renewed motion for summary judgment of non-infringement was granted. Plaintiffs’ motion to exclude evidence of testing by Cordis’ expert Dr. Sabatini and related testimony was denied. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment of validity due to no anticipation was granted.
Continue Reading...Expert's testimony about non-infringement expert's opinion was precluded
Thynge, J. Defendants’ motion to preclude certain testimony from an infringement expert was granted in part and denied in part.
Damages expert's testimony was limited in part
Thynge, J. A motion in limine to limit expert testimony was granted in part. A motion for summary judgment to preclude damages for non-infringing lines was denied.
Continue Reading...An untimely expert report was limited
Thynge, J. A motion to preclude invalidity expert’s first report based on unreliable methods was discussed in separate opinion. A motion to dismiss a supplemental report was granted in part as untimely.
Continue Reading...Summary judgment of non-infringement granted
LP Matthews, L.L.C. v. Bath & Body Works, Inc. et al., No. 04-1507-SLR, Oct. 19, 2006.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s summary judgment motion based on infringement is denied. Defendants’ non-infringement motions are granted.
A few in limine motions granted before jury trial; most denied
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.
Evidentiary rulings after bench trial
Forest Laboratories, Inc. v. Ivex Pharmaceuticals, Inc., No. 03-891-JJF July 25, 2006.
Farnan, J. After a bench trial, the court sustained about 10 out of 30 evidentiary objections after post-trial briefing.
Continue Reading...
Insufficient means plus function evidence results in partial summary judgment of non-infringement
McKesson Information Solutions, LLC v. The Trizetto Group, Inc., No. 04-1258-SLR, Apr. 5, 2006.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment of infringement is denied due to genuine issues of material fact. Defendant’s motion is granted in part where plaintiff’s experts have not performed a structure to structure comparison as required in a means plus function infringement analysis. It is otherwise denied.
Continue Reading...Partial summary judgment granted to both sides regarding infringement
Padcom, Inc. v. NetMotion Wireless, Inc., C.A. No. 03-983-SLR, Feb. 22, 2006.
Robinson, J. Infringement and noninfringement summary judgment motions granted in part, denied in part.
Continue Reading...