Patent claim is found obvious in view of prior art

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...

Expert testimony was excluded in part and allowed in part in trial on damages.

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...

Limited expedited discovery allowed in support of preliminary injunction

Kone Corporation v. Thyssenkrupp USA, Inc., et al., Civ. Action No. 11-465-LPS-CJB, September 26, 2011.

Burke, M. J.  Motion for leave to take expedited discovery granted in part.

Continue Reading...

Cause of action for inequitable conduct was not established for trial

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...

Common interest privilege is upheld

Xerox Corporation v. Google Inc. and Yahoo! Inc., C. A. No. 10-136-LPS, August 1, 2011.

Stark, J.  Defendants’ motion to compel documents withheld as privileged under the common interest doctrine is denied. Court construes patent terms.

Continue Reading...

Limited discovery ordered on motions to dismiss and transfer

Gian Biologics, LLC v. Biomet Inc. and Biomet Biologics, LLC, Civil Action No. 10-865-LPS, June 21, 2011.

Stark, J.  Stay was entered pending completion of discovery on personal jurisdiction and venue issues.

Continue Reading...

Third party intervention allowed to challenge protective order

LG Display Co., Ltd. v. Au Optronics Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 06-726-LPS, December 29, 2010.

Stark, J.  Third party Anvik’s motion for limited intervention to obtain copies of evidence is granted in part and denied in part.

Continue Reading...

Court declines to reopen fact discovery

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...

Court precludes expert testimony, denies judgment on the pleadings

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...

Infringement found on summary judgment; invalidity left for trial

Kenexa Brassring Inc. v. Taleo Corporation, et al., Civ. No. 07-521-SLR, November 18, 2010.

Robinson, J.  Defendant’s motion for summary judgment of patent invalidity is denied. Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment of infringement is granted in part. Vurv products infringe all asserted claims, Taleo products infringe all but two claims of one patent-in suit, and all but one claim of the a second patent-in-suit.

Continue Reading...

30(b)(6) deposition of party re foreign subsidiary knowledge is ordered

Ethypharm S.A. France v. Abbott Laboratories, Civil Action No.08-126-SLR-MPT, November 15, 2010.

Thynge, M. J.  Plaintiff’s motion to proceed on discovery matters under the Federal Rules rather than the Hague Convention is granted in part and denied in part.

Continue Reading...

Letters of request exclude patent prosecution not at issue in lawsuit

Ethypharm S.A. France v. Abbott Laboratories, Civil Action No.08-126-SLR-MPT, November 2, 2010.

Thynge, M. J.  Plaintiff’s motion to issue letters of request for depositions of at least six French current or former employees of defendant is granted in part and denied in part.

Continue Reading...

Defendants' bid for inadvertently produced privileged documents fails

Allergan Inc. v. Barr Laboratories Inc.,, et al., Civ. No.09-333-SLR-LPS, August 18, 2010.

Stark, J.  After submissions and a discovery teleconference, the court rules on defendants’ motion to compel privileged documents.

Continue Reading...

Amendment and discovery is permitted in copyright case

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...

No common interest with litigation financing companies ruling is upheld

Leader Technologies, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc., Civil Action No. 08-862-JJF, June 24, 2010.

Farnan, J.  Plaintiff’s objections to the Magistrate’s discovery order of March 10, 2010 are overruled.  Defendant’s objections to the Magistrate’s discovery order of April 27, 2010 are overruled.

Continue Reading...

Letters of Request to depose witnesses in Sweden and Norway are granted

Pronova Biopharma Norge AS v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Civil Action No.09-286-SLR-MPT, April 27, 2010.

Thynge, M. J.  Defendant’s motion for issuance of Letters of Request is granted. Plaintiff’s motion to file a surreply is granted.

Continue Reading...

Discovery is denied on stayed antitrust claims

Masimo Corporation v. Philips Electronics North America Corp., et al., Civil Action No.09-80-MPT, March 23, 2010.

Thynge, M. J.  Defendants’ motion to compel discovery is denied.

Continue Reading...

On reconsideration, antitrust claims remain stayed and misuse claims are also bifurcated; certification request fails

Masimo Corporation v. Philips Electronics North America Corp., Civil Action No.09-80-MPT, April 19, 2010.

Thynge, M. J.  Defendant’s motion for reconsideration of its order bifurcating antitrust claims and staying related discovery is denied.  The order is amended to bifurcate patent misuse claims and stay related discovery.  The court declines to grant a motion to certify a question of law.

 

 

Continue Reading...

Discovery to support claims not yet alleged is deemed improper

Eurand, Inc., et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Civ. No.08-889-SLR-MPT, April 13, 2010.

Thynge, M. J.  The Court grants defendant’s request for limited discovery only.

Continue Reading...

Advice of counsel defense to inequitable conduct results in a privilege waiver

Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Inc., et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al., Civil Action No.08-464-SLR, March 31, 2010.

Bartle, C.J.  Defendants’ motion for an order finding that plaintiffs have waived the attorney-client privilege is granted.

Continue Reading...

Foreign inventors must testify in U.S. if under control of party or contractually obligated to provide testimony

Aerocrine AB and Aerocrine Inc. v. Apieron Inc., Civ. No.08-787-LPS, March 30, 2010.

Stark, M. J.  Defendant’s motion to take depositions of foreign inventors in the U.S. is granted in part and denied in part. Defendant’s motion to compel plaintiff to produce two NIOX devices is granted in part but limited to one.

Continue Reading...

Plaintiff's request to reargue its motion to compel is denied

Robert Bosch LLC v. Pylon Manufacturing Corp., C. A. No.08-542-MPT, March 19, 2010.

Thynge, M. J.  Plaintiff’s motion for reargument is denied

Continue Reading...

Antitrust claims are bifurcated and discovery is stayed

Masimo Corporation v. Philips Electronics North America Corp., et al., Civil Action No.09-80-MPT, March 11, 2010.

Thynge, M. J.  Plaintiff’s motion to bifurcate and stay discovery of defendant’s antitrust counterclaims is granted. Discovery is stayed pending trial on the patent issues.

 

Continue Reading...

Patent law expert may see confidential information

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...

Privilege claim is upheld, but privilege log supplementation is required

Webxchange Inc. v. Dell Inc., C.A. No.08-132-JJF, February 16, 2010.

Farnan, J. Defendants’ motion to compel withheld documents is granted in part and denied in part.

Continue Reading...

Disputed contention, even if untimely, is allowed as harmless error

Webxchange Inc. v. Fedex Corporation, et al., C.A. No.08-133b-JJF, January 20, 2010.

Farnan, J.  Defendants’ motion to strike Plaintiff’s Third supplemental Response to Defendants’ Interrogatory No. 1 and for a protective order and motion for leave to file a surreply in opposition to Plaintiff’s motion to compel deposition testimony is denied.  Plaintiff’s motion to compel deposition testimony is granted in part and denied in part.

Continue Reading...

Plaintiff's motion to compel documents withheld as privileged is denied

Robert Bosch LLC v. Pylon Manufacturing Corp., C.A. No. 08-542-SLR/MPT, December 23, 2009.

Thynge, M.J.  Plaintiff’s motion to compel is denied. Defendant’s oral motion to compel raised at the hearing is also denied. Defendant’s motion for leave to file a reply in response to plaintiff’s latest submission is granted.

Continue Reading...

Discovery rulings issue in ANDA case

Eurand, Inc., Cephalon, Inc. and Anesta AG v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 08-889-SLR-MPT; Eurand, Inc., Cephalon, Inc. and Anesta AG v. Impax Laboratories, Inc., C.A. No. 09-18-SLR-MPT, December 9, 2009.

Thynge, M.J.  Defendant’s request for lab notebooks and other R&D documents relating to a product other that covered by the patent-in-suit is denied. Defendant’s request for disclosure of secondary considerations evidence is granted.

Continue Reading...

Noninfringement contentions ordered prior to date set in scheduling order

B. Braun Melsungen AG, et al. v. Terumo Medical Corporation, et al., C.A. No. 09-347-JJF-LPS, November 18, 2009.

Stark, M.J.  Plaintiff’s request for non-infringement contentions in advance of the deadline in scheduling order is granted.  Plaintiff’s request for supplementation of Defendant’s interrogatory responses is denied.  Defendant’s request for supplementation of infringement contentions is denied.  Its request for discovery relating to conception and reduction to practice is denied.

Continue Reading...

Fast-track schedule is bumped for provisional damages and willfulness discovery

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...

Fees are awarded in 30(b)(6) spat

Innovative Patents, LLC, et al. v. Brain-Pad, Inc., C.A. No. 07-680-MPT, November 4, 2009.

Thynge, M. J.  Defendant’s motion for fees and costs relating to the deposition of a 30(b)(6) corporate representative is granted in part.

Continue Reading...

Limited discovery on damages is permitted during liability phase in bifurcated cases

Teles AG Informationstechnologien v. Quintum Technologies, LLC, C.A. No. 06-197-SLR-LPS, October 30, 2009.

Stark, M. J.  The Magistrate orders defendants to produce certain damages information within 20 days of the Order.

 

Continue Reading...

Jurisdictional discovery is ordered

Gannett Satellite Information Network, Inc. v. Office Media Network, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 08-96-GMS, October 23, 2009.

Sleet, C. J.  Defendant’s motion to dismiss is held in abeyance pending jurisdictional discovery. Defendant’s request to take jurisdictional discovery is granted.

Continue Reading...

Magistrate recommends denial of defendant's motion to dismiss -- again.

 McKesson Automation, Inc. v. Swisslog Holding AG, et al., Civ. No. 06-28-LPS, October 30, 2009.

The Magistrate recommends denial of defendant’s motion to dismiss.  Disputed terms are construed following a Markman Hearing.  In addition recommendations are made on several competing motions for summary judgment.  Finally, the parties’ competing motions to preclude expert testimony are denied.

Continue Reading...

Prior art precluded as untimely; Further briefing on on-sale bar is ordered

Laboratory Skin Care, Inc. and Zahra Mansouri v. Limited Brands, Inc. and Bath and Body Works, LLC, Civil Action No. 06-601-JJF, October 14, 2009.

Farnan, J.  Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on invalidity is denied. Defendants’ motion for leave to supplement is granted and plaintiffs’ motion to preclude is granted. Further briefing is ordered with regard to defendants’ motion for summary judgment pursuant to §102(b).

Continue Reading...

Post-remand schedule issues in stent case

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...

Contract dispute re: sale of IP is dismissed

Eurofins Pharma US Holdings, Inc., et al. v. Bioalliance Pharma SA, et al., C.A. No. 08-613-GMS, September 18, 2009.

Sleet, C. J.  Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, failure to state a claim, and forum non conveniens is granted.

Continue Reading...

Magistrate lifts stay of source code production while objections are pending

Leader Technologies Inc. v. Facebook Inc., Civ. No. 08-862-JJF-LPS, September 4, 2009.

Stark, M.J.  Plaintiff’s request to modify the scheduling order is granted in part and denied in part.  Defendant’s request to compel a supplemental response to interrogatory is granted in part and denied in part.  Plaintiff’s request to continue the stay the court’s prior discovery ruling requiring production of source code is denied notwithstanding pending objections to that order before the trial judge.

Continue Reading...

Court lacks jurisdiction to resolve out-of-state deposition dispute

Accenture Global Services GMBH, et al. v. Guidewire Software, Inc., Civ. No. 07-826- SLR, July 29, 2009.

Robinson, J.  Court rules that it is without jurisdiction to resolve a work product dispute asserted by plaintiff’s attorney representing nonparty at a deposition taken outside this jurisdiction.

Continue Reading...

Plaintiff awarded costs of defending motion for discovery abuse sanctions

Dow Chemical Canada Inc. v. HRD Corporation (d/b/a Marcus Oil & Chemical), Civil Action No. 05-023-JJF, July 30, 2009.

Farnan, J.  Defendant’s motion for discovery abuse sanctions is denied with the costs of defending the motion awarded to plaintiff.

Continue Reading...

Third-party subpoena is held invalid for deposition outside Delaware

Hallamore Corporation v. Capco Steel Corporation, Misc. Action No. 08-211-SLR, June 30, 2009.

Robinson, J.  Plaintiff’s motion to compel a non-party to attend a deposition and produce documents pursuant to a subpoena issued in Delaware is denied and the subpoena is deemed invalid.

Continue Reading...

Rebate information is held discoverable in antitrust case

State of Florida, et al., v. Abbott Laboratories, et al., Civ. No. 08-155-SLR, June 23 , 2009.

Robinson, J.  Defendants’ request for discovery relating to rebates received for fenofibrate products is granted.

Continue Reading...

Failure to respond to discovery results in waiver of objections

SWIMC, Inc. v. Hy-Tech Thermal Solutions, LLC, et al., Civ. No. 08-084-SLR, June 24 , 2009.

Robinson, J.  Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery is granted.

Continue Reading...

Jurisdictional discovery is allowed following jurisdiction and venue challenges

Belden Technologies, Inc. v. LS Corporation, et al., Civ. No. 08-823-SLR, June 17, 2009.

Robinson J.  Defendants' motion to dismiss for insufficiency of service of process is denied.  The Court denies without prejudice defendants' motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue in order to allow jurisdictional discovery.

Continue Reading...

Discovery is ordered but limited in light of marginal relevance and burden

In re: Rosuvastatin Calcium Patent Litigation, MDL No. 08-1949, Civ. No. 07-807-JJF-LPS, June 3 , 2009(redacted).

Stark, M. J.  Plaintiff’s motion to compel is granted in part and denied in part.

Continue Reading...

Motion to compel third party discovery is granted

Software Rights Archive, LLC v. Google, Inc., et al., Misc. No. 07-017-JJF, May 21 , 2009.

Farnan J.  Movants’ motion to compel the production of documents by third parties is granted.

Continue Reading...

Plaintiff and counsel are sanctioned for willful violation of Discovery Order

Sea Star Line, LLC v. Emerald Equipment Leasing, Inc., Civ. No. 05-245-JJF-LPS, May 26 , 2009.

Stark, M. J.  Magistrate finds initial award of sanctions is appropriate on remand and extends order to include sanctions against both plaintiff and its counsel.

Continue Reading...

Jurisdiction is proper where accused product sold to Delaware company is sold in components to Delaware plants

W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc., et al. v.Label Technologies, Inc., C.A. No. 08-111-GMS, May 15 , 2009.

Sleet, C. J.  Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction is denied. Based on that ruling, plaintiff’s request for jurisdictional discovery is denied as moot.

Continue Reading...

Limited discovery is ordered in §291 interference action

Genetics Institute, LLC v. Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, Inc., Civ. No. 08-290-SLR, May 7 , 2009.

Robinson J.  Plaintiff’s motion to set a trial date and defendant’s motion for reargument are both denied pending limited discovery.

Continue Reading...

Discovery disputes are resolved

In Re: Rosuvastatin Calcium Patent Litigation, MDL No. 08-1949, April 27, 2009.

Stark, M. J.  Defendant’s motion to compel certain documents is denied.

Continue Reading...

Order compelling certain co-promotion documents issues

In re: Rosuvastatin Calcium Patent Litigation, MDL No. 08-1949a-LPS, May 7 , 2009.

Stark, M. J.  Defendants’ application for co-marketing is granted to the extent of plaintiff’s proposed compromise. The Court defers ruling on Plaintiff’s application for a defendant’s research and development efforts to allow for further attempts to compromise.

Continue Reading...

Transfer to forum of previous litigation is denied

Quantum Loyalty Systems, Inc. and Quantum Corporation of New York, Inc., v. TPG Rewards, Inc., Civ. No. 09-022-SLR, April 2, 2009.

Robinson, J.  Defendant’s motion to transfer to the Southern District of New York is denied.

Continue Reading...

Bid for defense fees fails in suit dropped after Markman hearing

Parker-Hannifin Corporation, et al. v. Seiren Co., Ltd., Civil Action No. 07-104-MPT, March 31, 2009.

Thynge, M.J.  Defendant’s motion for attorney’s fees and expenses based on bad faith claim and its request for additional discovery is denied.

Continue Reading...

Plaintiff fails to establish that the agency or alter ego theories of jurisdiction apply

LivePerson, Inc. v. NextCard, LLC, et al., C.A. No. 08-062-GMS, March 20, 2009.

Sleet, C.J.   Court grants defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personnel jurisdiction.  Plaintiff’s motions for jurisdictional discovery and to amend are denied.

Continue Reading...

Untimely review results in privilege waiver despite clawback agreement

In Re: Rembrandt Technologies, LP Patent Litigation, MDL Docket No. 07-1848-GMS-LPS, March 6, 2009.

Stark, M.J.  Defendants’ motion to retain and use non-party’s purportedly privileged documents was granted where privilege was waived due to lack of diligence.

Continue Reading...

Court denies competing discovery motions where both parties contributed to delay and plaintiff has access to requested information

CIF Licensing, LLC, d/b/a GE Licensing v. Agere Systems Inc., Civ. No. 07-170-JJF, January 23, 2009.

Farnan, J.  Court denies both plaintiff’s motion to compel and defendant’s motion for a protective order.

Continue Reading...

Court denies competing discovery motions where both parties contributed to delay and plaintiff has access to requested information

CIF Licensing, LLC, d/b/a GE Licensing v. Agere Systems Inc., Civ. No. 07-170-JJF, January 23, 2009.

Farnan, J.  Court denies both plaintiff’s motion to compel and defendant’s motion for a protective order.

Continue Reading...

Court denies competing discovery motions where both parties contributed to delay and plaintiff has access to requested information

CIF Licensing, LLC, d/b/a GE Licensing v. Agere Systems Inc., Civ. No. 07-170-JJF, January 23, 2009.

Farnan, J.  Court denies both plaintiff’s motion to compel and defendant’s motion for a protective order.

Continue Reading...

Patents-in-suit declared unenforceable due to spoliation of evidence and defendant's bad faith litigation conduct

Micron Technology, Inc. v. Rambus Inc., Civ. No. 00-792-SLR, January 9, 2009.

Robinson, J.  Court declares patents-in-suit unenforceable following bench trial on issues of alleged spoliation of evidence and unclean hands by defendant.

Continue Reading...

Magistrate's Memorandum Order resolving discovery dispute is upheld

Human Genome Sciences, Inc. v. Amgen, Inc. and Immunex, Corp., Civ. No. 07-526-SLR-MPT, December 16, 2008.

Robinson, J.  Court overrules objection to Magistrate’s Memorandum Order and adopts it in all respects.

Continue Reading...

Foreign discovery under the Hague Convention is denied.

Purdue Pharma Products L.P., et al. v. Par Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 07-255-JJF, August 26, 2008.

Farnan, J.  Court grants non-party’s motion to quash and denies defendants’ application requesting issuance of a letter of request for documents and deposition testimony in Germany under the Hague Convention.

Continue Reading...

Certain expert testimony is stricken where documents were not produced

Siemens Medical SolutionsUSA, Inc. v. Saint-Gobain Ceramics & Plastics, Inc., C.A. No. 07-190-SLR, August 20, 2008.

Robinson, J. Motion to exclude certain expert testimony is granted. Motion to strike affirmative defense of estoppel is deferred.

Continue Reading...

Non-party is sanctioned for vexatious conduct during discovery dispute

In re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Litigation., C.A. No. 05-1717 JJF, May 14, 2008.

Farnan, J.  This Court adopts Special Master’s recommendation that non-party be sanctioned for vexatious litigation conduct during adjudication of discovery dispute.




 

Continue Reading...

Subpoena conduct allegations result in evidentiary hearing

Digacomm, LLC v. Vehicle Safety & Compliance, LLC, et al., C.A. No. 08-MC-63-JJF, April 29, 2008.

Farnan, J.  Plaintiff petitioned to enforce a subpoena to the Fish and Richardson law firm.  The Court ordered an evidentiary hearing.to resolve professional issues even if the subpoena issues are fully resolved.




 

Continue Reading...

Sanctions awarded due to improper deposition objections

Promos Technologies, Inc. v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc., C.A. No. 06-788-JJF, December 20, 2007.

Farnan, J.  The Court grants a motion to compel Defendant to reproduce a 30(b)(6) witness where improper objections were asserted.  Sanctions were awarded. 

Continue Reading...

Special Discovery Master's discovery rulings were overturned

LG. Philips LCD Co., Ltd., v. Tatung Co., et al., No. 04-343-JJF, July 13, 2007.

Farnan, J.  Exceptions to discovery rulings relating to willfulness and advice of counsel defenses were sustained.

Continue Reading...

Patentee ordered to produce foreign-based inventors for deposition in the U.S.

Amgen, Inc., et al., v. Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., No. 06-259-MPT, May 14, 2007.

Thygne, J.  The Court ordered defendants to produce the foreign-based inventors for deposition in the U.S. in patent declaratory judgment action.

Continue Reading...
Tags:

Settlement agreement was immune from discovery, and shared opinion was protected by the common interest privilege.

Block Drug Co., Inc. v. Sedona Labs., Inc. et al.,No. 06-350-***, April 19, 2007

Thynge, Magistrate Judge.  Plaintiff sought production of 2 agreements between Defendants Sedona and Nutri-Health.  Certain portions of an agreement of “Confidentiality of Shared Opinion” were ordered produced after in camera review.  A settlement agreement was not required to be produced.

Continue Reading...

Defense tactics result in denial of JMOL and new trial motions

Praxair, Inc. et al. v. ATMI, Inc. et al., No. 03-1158-SLR, Aug. 17, 2006.

Robinson, J.  Defendants’ motions for JMOL and new trial are denied. Continue Reading...

Expert's testimony about non-infringement expert's opinion was precluded

Inline Connection Corp. et al. v. AOL Time Warner Inc. et al., Nos. 02-272-MPT, 02-477-MPT (consolidated), Feb. 5, 2007.


Thynge, J.  Defendants’ motion to preclude certain testimony from an infringement expert was granted in part and denied in part.




Continue Reading...

German nationals were subject to Hague, not American, depositions

Medpointe Healthcare Inc. v. Apotex, Inc., et al., D. Del. No. 06-164-SLR, Jan. 26, 2007.

Robinson, J.  The court ordered depositions of German nationals by means of the Hague Convention.

Continue Reading...
Tags:

Untimely prior art references were precluded due to lack of diligence

Bridgestone Sports Co. Ltd. v. Acushnet Co., No. 05-132-JJF, Feb. 15, 2007.

Farnan, J.  A motion to preclude untimely disclosed prior art references was granted.

Continue Reading...

Civil conspiracy to commit patent infringement and evade discovery is not actionable

Digene Corporation v. Ventana Medical Systems, Inc., et al., No. 01-752-MPT, Mar. 6, 2007.

Thynge, J.  A motion to dismiss a count of civil conspiracy to commit patent infringement and evade discovery obligations was granted.


Continue Reading...

Subpoena quashed where former employees had already provided testimony

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc., No. 04-1371-JJF, Aug. 24, 2006.

Farnan, J.  The court quashed a third party subpoena of Intersil as cumulative to and duplicative of previous subpoenas issued to Intersil’s former employees.  Non cumulative topics were held to be irrelevant to this lawsuit.

Continue Reading...
Tags:

Privilege not waived in asserting advice of counsel defense where documents were not disclosed to accused infringer

Affinion Net Patents, Inc. v. Maritz, Inc., No. 04-360-JJF, July 28, 2006.

Farnan, J.  Patentee’s motion to compel two claims charts where privilege was waived due to advice-of-counsel defense was denied.

 

Continue Reading...

Wavier of privilege as a result of advice of counsel defense does not extend to all communications with trial counsel

Ampex Corp. v. Eastman Kodak Co., et al., No. 04-1373-KAJ, July 17, 2006.

Jordan, J.  Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of privileged documents denied.

 

Continue Reading...

Trade secret count survives motion to dismiss

Mobius Management Systems, Inc. v. Acartus, Inc., No. 05-346-SLR, June 28, 2006.

Robinson, J.  Defendant’s motion to strike, dismiss and stay amended complaint is denied.

Continue Reading...

Pretrial limitations on deposition testimony ordered

McKesson Information Solutions LLC v. The Trizetto Group, Inc., No. 04-1258-SLR, Apr. 17, 2006.

Robinson, J.  Pretrial order regarding disputed deposition designations.

Continue Reading...

Court rules on issues argued at pretrial conference

McKesson Information Solutions LLC v. The Trizetto Group, Inc., No. 04-1258-SLR, Apr. 11, 2006.

Robinson, J.  The Court rules on bifurcated trial, in limine and discovery issues argued at the pretrial conference.

Continue Reading...