Posted on June 24, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Remy Inc., et al. v. CIF Licensing, et al., C.A. No. 06-785- (GMS/MPT), June 9, 2008.
Thynge, M.J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss due to pending litigation first filed in Texas is granted.
Continue Reading...
Posted on June 24, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
McKesson Automation, Inc. v. Swisslogic Holding AG, et al., C.A. No. 06-28-(SLR-LPS), May 30, 2008.
Stark, M.J. Magistrate recommends that defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted due to plaintiff’s lack of standing to sue.
Continue Reading...
Posted on May 22, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Posted on April 14, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, et al., v. On Semiconductor Corp., et al., C.A. No. 06-720-JFF, April 3, 2008.
Farnan, J. Applying new jurisdictional test adopted by the Supreme Court and recent Federal Circuit case law, the Court finds actual controversy sufficient to warrant declaratory judgment action.
Continue Reading...
Posted on April 3, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Posted on March 14, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Elan Corporation, PLC et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., C.A. No. 07-552-SLR, March 7, 2008.
Robinson, J. Court denies plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss counterclaims and affirmative defenses relating to claims of inequitable conduct with leave to renew at a later date.
Continue Reading...
Posted on March 14, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. v. Saint-Gobain Ceramics & Plastics, C.A. No. 07-190-SLR, March 7, 2008.
Robinson, J. Court conditionally grants motion to dismiss where plaintiff licensee lacked standing unless patentee is joined by date certain.
Continue Reading...
Posted on February 27, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Tristrata Technology, Inc. v. Emulgen Laboratories, Inc, et al., C.A. No. 06-652-JJF, February 25, 2008.
Farnan, J. Court denies Defendant’s motion to dismiss and transfer venue and holds that jurisdiction and venue are proper where the company targeted sales of allegedly infringing product to Delaware residents as part of national e-mail campaign.
Continue Reading...
Posted on February 14, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Power Integrations, Inc., v. BCD Semiconductor Corporation, et al., C.A. No. 07-633-JJF-LPS, February 11, 2008.
Farnan, J. Court denies defendants’ motion to stay pending resolution of motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction since any efforts taken (including discovery) could be useful in declaratory judgment action pending in Northern District of California between same parties.
Continue Reading...
Posted on February 7, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Boston Scientific Corporation, et al., v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., C.A. Nos. 07-333, 07-348, 07-409 and 07-765-SLR, January 24, 2008.
Robinson, J. The Court denies several motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and motions to transfer in related declaratory judgment patent actions.
Continue Reading...
Posted on January 29, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Callaway Golf Company v. Acushnet Company, C.A. No. 06-091-SLR, December 4, 2007.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion for reconsideration of a summary judgment ruling is denied. Miscellaneous pre-trial rulings are made.
Continue Reading...
Posted on January 24, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Posted on January 6, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Posted on January 6, 2008 by MorrisJames Delaware
Abbott Laboratories, et al. v. Johnson & Johnson, Inc. and Cordis Corporation, C.A. Nos. 06-613-SLR and 07-259-SLR, November 28, 2007.
Robinson, J. Plaintiffs' motion to supplement their complaints are denied. Plaintiffs' motion to enjoin Defendants from prosecuting a New Jersey action is denied. Defendants' motion to dismiss one action based on a covenant not to sue is granted and the court dismisses the second Delaware action sua sponte in favor of a first-filed New Jersey action.
Continue Reading...
Posted on December 20, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Pfizer Inc., et. al. v. Ranbaxy Laboratories, Limited et al., C.A. No. 07-138-JJF, November 29, 2007.
Farnan, J. Plaintiffs’ motions to dismiss in part declaratory judgment counterclaims and to dismiss and for partial summary judgment on the pleadings are granted.
Continue Reading...
Posted on December 20, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Cordance Corporation v. Amazon.com.Inc., C.A. No. 06-491-MPT, November 20, 2007.
Thynge, M.J. Motion to dismiss counterclaim of infringement on the basis of no actual controversy is denied.
Continue Reading...
Posted on December 5, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Time Warner Cable, Inc., v. USA Video Technology Corp., C.A. No. 06-387-***, October 31, 2007.
Thynge, M.J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint in favor of a first filed action in Texas is granted. The motion to stay or transfer to Texas is denied as moot. Plaintiff’s motion to enjoin duplicative litigation is denied as moot.
Continue Reading...
Posted on October 16, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Abbott Diabetes Care, Inc., v. Dexcom, Inc., C.A. No. 06-514-GMS, September 30, 2007.
Sleet, C.J. Defendant’s motion to strike the complaint is denied. Dexcom’s motion to consolidate this proceeding and to stay this proceeding pending reexamination of the seven patents-in-suit is granted.
Continue Reading...
Posted on October 16, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Abbott Laboratories, et al., v. Johnson and Johnson, et al., C.A. No. 06-613-SLR, September 27, 2007.
Robinson, J. Defendants’ first motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is denied as moot. Decision on second motion filed after covenant not to sue was executed remains pending.
Continue Reading...
Posted on October 16, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
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...
Posted on August 27, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Posted on August 15, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Sun Optics, Inc. v. FGX International, Inc., C.A. No. 07-137- SLR, August 2, 2007.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction and defendant’s motion to dismiss are denied.
Continue Reading...
Posted on August 9, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Posted on August 9, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Crown Packaging Technology, Inc., et al., v. Rexam Beverage Can Co., C.A. No. 05-608-MPT, July 24, 2007.
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...
Posted on August 9, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Posted on August 9, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Time Warner Cable v. GPNE Corp., C.A. No. 07-67-MPT, July 20, 2007.
Thynge, M.J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss in light of prior pending action was granted. The motion to stay or transfer was denied as moot.
Continue Reading...
Posted on June 18, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Digene Corporation v. Ventana Medical Systems Inc., et al., No. 01-752-MPT, June 12, 2007.
Thynge, J. Beckman Coulter, Inc.’s motion to dismiss on res judicata grounds based upon a favorable arbitration decision was granted.
Continue Reading...
Posted on June 6, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Merck & Co., Inc. v. Apotex, Inc., No. 06-230-GMS, May 21, 2007.
Sleet, J. The Court dismissed the action where actual controversy was resolved by plaintiff’s execution of covenant not to sue.
Continue Reading...
Posted on May 4, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Knova Software, Inc. et al. v. Inquira, Inc., No. 067-381-JJF, Apr. 27, 2007.
Farnan, J. Defendant's motion to dismiss claims of intentional interference with prospective economic relationships and unfair competition was granted. Motion to dismiss unjust enrichment claim was denied.
Continue Reading...
Posted on March 13, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Posted on March 13, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
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...
Posted on February 5, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Posted on January 25, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
LP Matthews, L.L.C. v. Bath & Body Works, Inc. et al., No. 04-1507-SLR, Oct. 19, 2006.
Robinson, J. Defendants’ motions to dismiss for lack of standing and failure to join a party are denied. Defendant BBW’s motion for summary judgment based on misassignment of the patent to the Greenspan Company rather than The Greenspan Corporation was denied.
Continue Reading...
Posted on January 25, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Posted on January 24, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Positec USA Inc. et al. v. Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp., No. 05-890 GMS, Sept. 25, 2006.
Sleet, J. The court denied a motion to dismiss this declaratory judgment action alleged to be unripe due to no objectively reasonably apprehension of imminent suit.
Continue Reading...
Posted on January 24, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Angiodynamics v. Diomed Holdings, Inc., No. 06-02 –GMS Sept. 7, 2006.
Sleet, J. Declaratory judgment action was dismissed due to no justiciable controversy. A motion to amend the complaint was also denied as futile.
Continue Reading...
Posted on January 24, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Abbott Diabetes Care, Inc. v. Dexcom, Inc., No. 05-590 GMS, Aug. 16, 2006.
Sleet, J. Motion to dismiss complaint is granted as to declaratory judgment count, and denied as to infringement count; motion to strike amended complaint is granted; and motion to stay pending reexamination is granted.
Continue Reading...
Posted on January 24, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Affymetrix, Inc. v. Illumina, Inc., No. 04-901-JJF, Aug. 16, 2006.
Farnan, J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss count II relating to U.S. Patent No. 5,795,716 because of lack of title to the ‘716 patent and therefore lack of standing was denied.
Continue Reading...
Posted on January 18, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Monsanto v. Syngenta Seeds, Inc. et al., No. 04-305-SLR, Aug. 4, 2006.
Robinson, J. Syngenta foreign holding companies’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction is granted. The disputed technology involves glyphosate-tolerant corn.
Continue Reading...
Posted on January 18, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Monsanto v. Syngenta Seeds, Inc., et al., No. 04-305-SLR, Aug. 4, 2006.
Robinson, J. Syngenta’s motion to dismiss Monsanto’s counterclaims of reverse passing off and false advertising under the Lanham Act was granted. Syngenta’s motion to dismiss Monsanto’s counterclaim alleging violations of the Delaware Deceptive Trade Practices Act was denied. The disputed technology relates to glyphosate-tolerant corn.
Continue Reading...
Posted on January 18, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Posted on January 18, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Affinion Net Patents, Inc. v. Maritz, Inc., No. 04-360-JJF, June 8, 2006.
Farnan, J. Plaintiff’s motion to amend complaint to assert Lanham claims and to dismiss counterclaims based on testimony that accused product was never implemented was granted.
Continue Reading...
Posted on January 17, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Crown Packaging Technology, Inc. v. Albermarle Corp., Inc., No. 05-892-JJF, June 8, 2006.
Farnan, J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss Lanham Act claims was granted. Supplemental state court claims were remanded to the Court of Chancery.
Continue Reading...
Posted on January 17, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Merck & Co., Inc. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc., No. 658-GMS, June 2, 2006.
Sleet, J. Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss its patent suit with prejudice is granted after plaintiff gave defendant a covenant not to sue.
Continue Reading...
Posted on January 17, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Posted on January 17, 2007 by MorrisJames Delaware
Synopsys, Inc. v. Magma Design Automation, No. 05-701-GMS, May 25, 2006.
Sleet, J. The Court denied plaintiff’s motion to dismiss 6 counts of defendant’s amended answer relating to the Sherman Act, Lanham Act and state law claims. It further denied plaintiff’s motion to bifurcate or stay the antitrust claims from the patent claims. Defendant’s motion to amend to add four counterclaims of patent infringement was granted.
Continue Reading...