Venetec International, Inc., v. Nexus Medical, LLC, C.A. No. 07-57-MPT, March 28, 2008.
Thynge, M.J. Court denies plaintiff’s motion for partial judgment on the pleadings and grants defendant’s motion in part to amend its answer and counterclaim to expand on its unenforceability defense.
Robinson, J. Following a bench trial, the Court finds that plaintiff failed to show infringement and is not persuaded by defendant’s claims of invalidity for obviousness and unenforceability due to inequitable conduct.
Continue Reading...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...Amgen, Inc., et al. v. Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al., C.A. No. 06-259-MPT, January 31, 2008.
Thynge, M.J. The Court grants plaintiffs’ motion to amend and supplement their counterclaim for inequitable conduct.
Continue Reading...TruePosition, Inc. v. Andrew Corporation, C.A. No. 05-747-SLR, January 23, 2008.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion to register judgment is denied. Plaintiff’s motion to strike certain evidence referenced in post-trial briefing is granted. Defendant’s motion to reopen the record on equitable issues is denied.
Continue Reading...Robinson, J. Court denies plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
Continue Reading...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.
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...TruePosition, Inc. v. Andrew Corporation, C.A. No. 05-747-SLR, August 23, 2007.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement is denied. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment of invalidity due to indefiniteness is denied. Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss five “standards-based” counterclaims is denied. Defendant can not present its fraud theory at trial because it cannot prove damages. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment relating to unfair competition is granted in part but denied as to fraud, equitable estoppel, implied license and promissory estoppel.
Continue Reading...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...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...Praxair, Inc. et al., v. ATMI, Inc. et al., No. 03-1158-SLR, June 13, 2007.
Robinson, C.J. After a bench trial on inequitable conduct held on December 12, 2005, the Court concluded the prior art withheld was not cumulative and that the individuals accused of inequitable conduct were aware of that art. Intent to deceive was based on the high materiality of the art.
Continue Reading...Digene Corporation v. Ventana Medical Systems, et al., No. 01-752-MPT, May 9, 2007.
Thygne, J. Court denied preliminary injunction against defendant asserting a license defense notwithstanding decision by an arbitration panel that the assignment between co-defendants of rights violated terms of a cross licensing agreement.
Continue Reading...IMX, Inc. v. Lendingtree, LLC, No. 03-1067-SLR, Apr. 25, 2007.
Robinson, C.J. Motion for reconsideration of the denial of a permanent injunction based on newly identified evidence was granted in part.
Continue Reading...Robinson, C.J. The Court found no inequitable conduct after a bench trial.
Continue Reading...Affymetrix, Inc. v. Illumina, Inc., No. 04-901 JJF, Mar. 30, 2007.
Farnan, J. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment regarding claims of intentional interference with economic advantage and unfair business practices was denied. Defendant’s motions for summary judgment of invalidity and inequitable conduct were denied. Claims of unfair business practices were bifurcated from the infringement trial.
Continue Reading...Praxair, Inc. et al. v. ATMI, Inc. et al., No. 03-1158-SLR, Mar. 27, 2007.
Robinson, J. A motion for permanent injunction following infringement verdict was denied with leave to renew following appellate review of the jury verdict.
Continue Reading...Medpointe Healthcare Inc. v. Apotex Inc., et al., D. Del. No. 06-164-SLR, Jan. 26, 2007.
Robinson, J. Motion to strike patent misuse defense was denied.
Continue Reading...IMX, Inc. v. LendingTree, LLC, No. 03-1067-SLR, Jan. 10, 2007.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion for JMOL and new trial was denied. Plaintiff’s motion for enhanced damages was granted. Plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction was denied with leave to supplement briefing.
Continue Reading...IMX, Inc. v. LendingTree, LLC, D. Del. No. 03-1067-SLR, Jan. 10, 2007.
Robinson, J. After bench trial on inequitable conduct, the court found the patent was not unenforceable due to failure to disclose prior art.
Continue Reading...
Ampex Corp. v. Eastman Kodak Co. et al., No. 04-1373-KAJ, Oct. 30, 2006.
Jordan, J. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment that the patent-in-suit is not unenforceable due to alleged inequitable conduct is denied; defendants’ motion for summary judgment of inequitable conduct is denied.
Continue Reading...
Ampex Corp. v. Eastman Kodak Co. et al., No. 04-1373-KAJ, Oct. 31, 2006.
Jordan, J. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment of non-infringement is granted.
Continue Reading...
Sanofi-Aventis et al., v. Advancis Pharmaceutical Corp., No. 03-1083-SLR, Sept. 26, 2006.
Robinson, J. After a bench trial in May, 2005, the court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law and ruled in favor of Aventis in this trademark infringement action. The court will order a permanent injunction and cancellation of defendant’s trademark.
Becton Dickinson and Co. v. Tyco Healthcare Group LP, No. 02-1694 GMS, Sept. 25, 2006.
Sleet, J. The court held a bench trial on inequitable conduct while jury deliberated on infringement and willfulness. After a willful infringement verdict, the court ruled that the patents were not unenforceable due to inequitable conduct.
Pharmacia & Upjohn Co. v. Sicor Inc. et al., No. 04-833-KAJ, Aug. 17. 2006.
Jordan, J. The Court construed claims regarding patent disclosing a “sterile, pyrogen-free, ready-to-use solution of anthracycline glycoside” used for treating tumors. Defendants’ motions for summary judgment of non-infringement and invalidity for lack of written description were denied. The Court granted plaintiff’s motion regarding defendants’ anticipation defense, and denied defendants’ motion on anticipation. Plaintiff’s motion regarding defendants’ unclean hands defense was denied.
Novozymes A/S v. Genencor International, Inc. et al., No 05-160-KAJ, Aug. 24, 2006.
Jordan, J. Defendants were found to infringe an enforceable patent relating to alpha-amylase enzymes after bench trial. A bench trial on willfulness and damages will follow. The 64-page opinion also addresses claim construction.
Continue Reading...Inline Connection Corp. v. AOL Time Warner Inc., et al., Nos. 02-272-MPT and 02-477-MPT (consolidated), Aug. 23, 2006.
Thynge, M.J. The court granted defendants’ motion to amend their pleadings to assert prosecution laches defenses and counterclaims, and denied the motion with respect to three additional inequitable conduct allegations.
Praxair, Inc. et al. v. ATMI, Inc. et al., No. 03-1158-SLR, Aug. 17, 2006
Robinson, J. Motion for judgment as a matter of law, or alternatively for a new trial, is denied. Defendant’s argument that no reasonable jury could have found that defendant’s products infringe was rejected. Expert’s unrebutted yet conclusory testimony failed to persuade the jury and does not meet the necessary clear and convincing standard. New trial unwarranted since excluded evidence resulted from trial by ambush tactics.
Continue Reading...
Praxair, Inc. et al. v. ATMI, Inc. et al., No. 03-1158-SLR, Aug. 17, 2006.
Robinson, J. The Court finds Defendant failed to prove inequitable conduct by clear and convincing evidence after a bench trial with respect to some art, but with respect to others, it deferred ruling pending additional proof as to intent. Trial testimony waived attorney client privilege with respect to communications between the attorney and the inventors, which will be reviewed in camera for evidence of intent.
Honeywell International, Inc. et al. v. Hamilton Sundstrand Corp., No. 99-309 (GMS), Aug. 14, 2006.
Sleet, J. After en banc remand, and two day bench trial the court holds that prosecution history estoppel bars plaintiff from asserting the doctrine of equivalents.
Continue Reading...Forest Laboratories, Inc., et al., v. IVAX Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al., No. 03-891-JJF; July 13, 2006.
Farnan, J. After 5-day bench trial, court finds defendants have not established that the patents-in-suit are invalid as anticipated, obvious, or impermissibly broadened upon reissue, nor that a patent is unenforceable for inequitable conduct.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion to transfer is denied. A motion to enjoin a New Jersey suit with additional patents in dispute filed hours after the Delaware suit is granted with respect to patents already part of the Delaware action and denied with respect to patents first filed in New Jersey.
Abbott Laboratories et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Nos. 02-1512-KAJ, 03-120-KAJ, 05-340-KAJ, 05-360-KAJ (consolidated), May 26, 2006.
Jordan, J. The Court denied Abbott and Fournier’s motion to dismiss various antitrust actions.
Commissariat A L'Energie Atomique v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 03-484-KAJ, Apr. 18, 2006.
Jordan, J. Redacted opinion regarding Defendants’ motion to disclose material designated as highly confidential pursuant to the protective order to defendants. The motion was granted.
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.
McKesson Information Solutions LLC v. The Trizetto Group, Inc., No. 04-1258-SLR, Apr. 5, 2006.
Robinson, J. Cross motions for summary judgment of laches are denied due to genuine issues of material fact. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on defendant’s equitable defense is denied.
Corning Incorporated, et al. v. SRU Biosystems, et al., No. 03-633-JJF, Mar. 7, 2006.
Farnan, J. No inequitable conduct found. SRU is permanently enjoined from engaging in infringing activity.
Continue Reading...eSpeed, Inc. et al. v. Brokertec USA, L.L.C., et al., No. 03-612-KAJ, Feb. 22, 2006.
Jordan, J. Post-trial rulings finding inequitable conduct. No attorneys’ fees awarded despite exceptional case.
Continue Reading...
Enter keywords:
For more information concerning any of these cases, contact Mary Matterer at mmatterer@morrisjames.com or 302.888.6960
