Delaware Patent Litigation Report : Delaware Intellectual Property Lawyer & Attorney : Morris James Law Firm : Delaware Patent Litigation Report

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.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

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.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

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.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Finjan Software, LTD. v. Secure Computing Corporation, C.A. No. 06-369-GMS, August 18, 2009.

Sleet, C. J.  All of defendants’ post-trial motions are denied, as well as plaintiff’s renewed motion for invalidity. However, the Court grants plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction and grants in part plaintiff’s motion for enhanced damages and its motion to amend the judgment and for an accounting of sales.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Telcordia Technologies, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., C.A. No. 04-876-GMS, January 6, 2009.

Sleet, C.J.  Defendant’s JMOL motion and motion for a new trial on willful infringement are denied; plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction is denied.  Parties are ordered to meet and confer on royalty rate going forward; plaintiff’s request for prejudgment interest and an accounting is granted but request for enhanced damages and attorney fees and expenses is denied.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link