Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Dey Pharma., L.P., et al., Civil Action No.06-113-LPS, January 27, 2012.
Stark, J. Motion for reconsideration granted in part and denied in part.
Continue Reading...Grape Technology Group, Inc. and KGB, Inc. v. Jingle Networks, Inc., Civ. A. No. 08-408-GMS, January 9, 2012.
Sleet, C. J. Plaintiff’s motion for a new trial is denied. Defendant’s motion for JMOL of invalidity is denied. Defendant’s motion for attorneys’ fees is denied.
Continue Reading...Senju Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., et al. v. Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp., Civ. No. 07-779-SLR, December 20, 2011.
Robinson, J. The court issues findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Continue Reading...Apeldyn Corporation v. AU Optronics Corporation, et al., Civ. No. 08-568-SLR, December 19, 2011.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion for reargument of summary judgment decision of noninfringement is denied; Defendant AUO’s motion for reargument of claim construction is granted, and motion for reargument of summary judgment opinion is granted.
Continue Reading...Apeldyn Corporation v. Au Optronics Corporation, et al., Civ. No. 08-568-SLR, November 15, 2011.
Robinson, J. Daubert motion is denied.
Continue Reading...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...Asahi Glass Co., LTD., et al. v. Guardian Industries Corp., Civ. No. 09-515a-SLR, September 26, 2011.
Robinson, J. Motion to exclude expert testimony will be addressed at the pretrial conference.
Continue Reading...Ateliers De La Haute-Garonne (French Corp.) and F2C2 Systems S.A.S. (French Corp.) v. Broetje Automation-USA Inc. (Delaware Corp.), Broetje Automation GMBH (German Corp.), Civ. No. 09-598-LPS, September 16, 2011.
Stark, J. Motions for summary judgment on infringement, no willful infringement, as to the statute of limitations, and on the issues of trade dress, unfair competition, and intentional interference with prospective economic advantage are denied. The parties’ respective Daubert motions also were are denied.
Continue Reading...nCUBE Corporation (now Arris Group, Inc.) v. Seachange International, Inc. (redacted), C. A. No. 01-011-LPS, September 2, 2011.
Stark, J. After a hearing on whether this dispute is amenable to a contempt proceeding, the court reserves judgment on plaintiff’s motion for contempt to hold defendant in contempt of permanent injunction order and schedules a contempt hearing.
Continue Reading...Solvay, S.A. v. Honeywell Specialty Materials LLC, et al., Civ. No. 06-557a-SLR, September 13, 2011.
Robinson, J. Cross motions in limine to exclude certain characterizations of the patent-in suit made in satellite patent prosecutions are granted. The court resolves other pretrial issues and denies Plaintiff’s motions for reargument
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, September 8, 2011.
Stark, J. Plaintiff’s renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law or for new trial is denied.
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...Stored Value Solutions, Inc. (“n/k/a”) Ceridian Stored Value Solutions, Inc. v. Card Activiation Technologies, Inc., et al., C. A. No. 09-495-KAJ (designated), July 1, 2011.
Jordan, J. (designated) Declaratory plaintiff’s motion on invalidity due to anticipation and obviousness is granted in part and its motion for partial summary judgment of invalidity due to lack of written description is granted. Declaratory defendant’s motions for summary judgment of validity and motion to exclude expert testimony are denied.
Continue Reading...Abbott Laboratories, et al. v. Lupin Limited, et al., C.A. No. 09-152-LPS (D. Del. May 19, 2011)
Stark. J. The court granted defendants’ motion for leave to file surreply brief in opposition to plaintiffs’ motion to exclude expert evidence and plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment of no invalidity for double patenting. The court denied plaintiffs’ motion to preclude defenses not disclosed in the defendants’ interrogatory responses and not contained in defendants’ Paragragh IV notice letter, defendants’ motion for summary judgment of invalidity for obviousness-type double patenting; and plaintiffs’ request to supplement its motion to preclude expert evidence.
Continue Reading...Boston Scientific Corporation, et al. v. Cordis Corporation, Civ. No. 10-315-SLR, April 13, 2011.
Robinson. J. Defendant’s motion to stay trial on damages and willfulness pending reexamination is denied; motion to submit supplemental brief in support of motion to stay is denied as moot; plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment of infringement is granted; defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment on the date of the hypothetical negotiation is denied; summary judgment is granted sua sponte in favor of plaintiff with respect to the date of hypothetical negotiation; defendant’s motion to exclude expert from relying on outcome of prior case in reasonable royalty analysis is denied; plaintiff’s motion to preclude damages testimony based on incorrect hypothetical negotiation dates is granted.
Continue Reading...ICU Medical, Inc. v. Rymed Technologies, Inc., Civ. No. 07-468-LPS, November 23, 2010.
Stark, J. Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings or partial summary judgment is denied. Plaintiff’s motion to preclude expert testimony is granted. Defendant’s motion to exclude section 282 notice and references is denied. 8 in limine motions are additionally decided.
Continue Reading...S.O.I. Tec Silicon On Insulator Technologies, S.A. and Commisseriat à L’Énergie Atomique v. MEMC Electronic Materials, Inc., Civ. No.08-292-SLR, October 13, 2010.
Robinson, J. The court rules on 10 summary judgment motions and expert issues.
Continue Reading...Stored Value Solutions, Inc. v. Card Activation Technologies, Inc., C. A. No.09-495-LPS, September 27, 2010.
Stark, J. Defendant’s motion to strike the rebuttal report of plaintiff’s
invalidity expert is denied.
The Dow Chemical Company v. Nova Chemicals Corporation, et al., Civil Action No.05-737a-JJF, July 30, 2010.
Farnan, J. Defendants’ motions for JMOL on invalidity, no entitlement to lost profits, non-infringement, and for a new trial are denied.
Continue Reading...Sigram Schindler Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Civ. Nos.09-72-SLR, 09-232-SLR, July 26, 2010.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff's motion to amend its pleadings is denied in part and denied in part as moot; defendant’s motion to dismiss Teles for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is denied as moot; SSBG is substituted for plaintiff pursuant to Rule 25(c); plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment of infringement is denied; defendant’s motion for summary judgment of noninfringement is granted; trial on the validity of the '453 and '902 patents is stayed pending final judgment by the Federal Circuit on the pending reexaminations; defendant’s motion for summary judgment of invalidity of the '453 and '902 patents is denied without prejudice to renew should the stay be lifted; defendant’s motion for summary judgment of invalidity of the '431 patent is granted; SSBG's motion for partial summary judgment of no inequitable conduct is denied; and both parties' motions to exclude expert testimony are denied as moot.
Continue Reading...Biovail Laboratories International SRL v. Cary Pharmaceuticals Inc., Civ. No.09-605-JJF-LPS, May 26, 2010.
Stark, M. J. Defendant’s motion to strike expert’s supplemental declaration is denied.
Continue Reading...The Dow Chemical Company v. Nova Chemicals Corporation (Canada), et al., Civil Action No.05-737-JJF, May 20, 2010.
Farnan, J. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment of noninfringement and/or invalidity is denied. The parties agree that portions of the invalidity argument are moot due to claim construction, and are therefore denied as moot. Defendants’ motion to strike untimely expert declarations 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.
LG Display Co., LTD. v. Au Optronics Corporation, et al., Civil Action No.06-726-JJF and 07-357-JJF April 30, 2010.
Farnan, J. CMO’s action is stayed; its motion for leave to file a response to post-trial briefs is denied. Plaintiff failed to prove defendant infringes plaintiff’s patents-in-suit. Defendant failed to prove plaintiffs’ patents are invalid. Final judgment is withheld until a damages opinion 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...UCB, Inc., et al. v. KV Pharmaceutical Company, Civil Action No.08-223-JJF, March 9, 2010.
Farnan, J. Plaintiffs’ three in limine motions and defendant’s three in limine motions are all denied.
Continue Reading...B. Braun Melsungen AG, et al. v. Terumo Medical Corporation, et al., C. A. No.09-347-JJF-LPS, February 25, 2010 (ORDER).
Stark, M. J. Plaintiff’s objections to Defendant’s request to share Plaintiff’s confidential information with its patent law expert are overruled.
Continue Reading...Smithkline Corporation v. Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Civ. No. 08-112- SLR, September 23, 2009.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion to strike defendant’s section 112 written description defenses and portions of expert report addressing those defenses is denied.
Continue Reading...Cordance Corporation v. Amazon.Com, Inc. and Amazon Web Services, LLC, Civil Action No. 06-491a-MPT, June 30, 2009.
Thynge, M. J. Defendant’s motion to strike second declaration by an inventor/expert is moot. The second declaration will not be considered for purposes of summary judgment.
Continue Reading...Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al., v. Abbott Laboratories et al., No. 02-1512-SLR; Impax Laboratories, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories, et al., No. 03-120-SLR; In re Tricor Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation, No. 05-340-SLR, November 5, 2008.
Robinson, J. The Court provides pre-trial guidance as to when a party may use the deposition testimony from the opposing party’s expert who is not expected to testify at trial.
Continue Reading...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.
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...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.
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.
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.
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...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...
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...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.
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...
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...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...Enter keywords:
For more information concerning any of these cases, contact Mary Matterer at mmatterer@morrisjames.com or 302.888.6960
