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...Nokia Corporation v. Apple Inc., C. A. No. 09-791-GMS, June 1, 2011.
Sleet, C.J. Plaintiff’s motion to stay defendant’s patent claims pending reexamination before the USPTO is denied; defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s requests for declaratory judgment that it met its FRAND licensing obligations is not barred by the doctrine of judicial estoppel; and denied defendant’s motion to strike plaintiff’s defense alleging anticompetitive conduct.
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...Tyco Healthcare Group, LP v. C.R. Bard, Inc., and Davol, Inc., Civ. No. 09-264-SLR, January 20, 2011.
Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion to bifurcate false marking claims is granted in part and denied in part; plaintiff’s motion to strike portions of expert report is denied; defendants’ motion to amend disputed claim chart is denied as moot; plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment for obviousness-type double patenting is granted; defendants’ motion for summary judgment regarding mismarking is granted – intent and damages to be tried to the court following jury trial; defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to invalidity due to inadequate written description is denied as moot; defendants’ motion for summary judgment of non-infringement is granted in part and denied in part; plaintiff’s motion for leave to serve supplemental expert report is denied.
Continue Reading...Biovail Laboratories International SRL v. Intelgenx Corp., Civ. No. 09-605-LPS, December 27, 2010.
Stark, J. Court construes two disputed terms.
Continue Reading...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...Innovative Patents, L.L.C. and Forcefield, LLC v. Brain-Pad, Inc., C.A. No. 07-680-MPT, June 29, 2010.
Thynge, M. J. Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment of infringement is denied, and defendant's motion for summary judgment of non infringement is granted
Continue Reading...Robert Bosch, LLC v. Pylon Manufacturing Corp., Civ. No.08-542-SLR, April 12, 2010.
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion for reconsideration of the court’s decision regarding the entitlement to equivalents is denied.
Continue Reading...Enter keywords:
For more information concerning any of these cases, contact Mary Matterer at mmatterer@morrisjames.com or 302.888.6960
