JMOL/New Trial : Delaware Patent Litigation Report

JMOL granted on certain infringement and validity claims

Posted on August 9, 2010 by Amy A. Quinlan

CIF Licensing, LLC, d/b/a GE Licensing v. Agere Systems, Inc., Civil Action No.07-170-JJF, July 30, 2010.

Farnan, J. Defendant's JMOL of no direct infringement on all claims is denied; defendant's JMOL of no indirect infringement of the ‘776 patent is granted; defendant's JMOL of no infringement under a theory of component liability is granted; defendant's JMOL of no infringement under the doctrine of equivalents is denied as moot; plaintiff's JMOL that the ‘054 patent is infringed and that it is not invalid is denied in part and granted in part. Plaintiff's motion is denied with regard to indirect infringement, and granted with regard to invalidity. Plaintiff's JMOLs that the ‘758, ‘776 and the ‘641 patents are infringed and that they are not invalid are denied.

Tags: Farnan, Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial

Defendants' JMOL bid fails

Posted on August 4, 2010 by Amy A. Quinlan

The Dow Chemical Company v. Nova Chemicals Corporation, et al., Civil Action No.05-737a-JJF, July 30, 2010.

Farnan, J. Defendants’ motions for JMOL on invalidity, no entitlement to lost profits, non-infringement, and for a new trial are denied.

Tags: Daubert/Experts, Farnan, Indefiniteness, Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Jury Issues/Instructions

JMOL and new trial are denied on noninfringement claims

Posted on August 3, 2010 by Amy A. Quinlan

Roche Diagnostics Operations, Inc., et al. v. Abbott Diabetes Carey, et al., Civil Action No.07-753-JJF, July 27, 2010.

Farnan, J. Plaintiff’s motion for JMOL on Defendant’s fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh counterclaims is moot. Defendant’s motion For JMOL on Defendant’s breach of contract and unfair competition counterclaims and Defendant’s motion for a new trial.

Tags: Farnan, JMOL/New Trial

JMOL as to adequate written description and no anticipation is granted

Posted on February 26, 2010 by Amy A. Quinlan

Cordance Corporation v. Amazon.com Inc. and Amazon Web Services, LLC, Civil Action No.06-491-MPT, February 22, 2010.

Thynge, M. J. Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law or, in the Alternative, for a New Trial is granted in part, denied in part, and dismissed as moot in part.

Tags: Indefiniteness, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Thynge

Court upholds noninfringement verdict, grants JMOL as to invalidity

Posted on February 16, 2010 by Amy A. Quinlan

Inline Connection Corporation, et al. v. Earthlink, Inc., C. A. No.02-272-MPT; C.A. No. 02-477-MPT, February 5, 2010.

Thynge, M. J. Plaintiff’s motion for judgment as a matter of law as to invalidity is granted but is denied as to noninfringement. Plaintiff’s motion for a new trial is also denied.

Tags: Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Obviousness, Thynge

New trial application fails; pre and post judgment interest is awarded

Posted on December 3, 2009 by Amy A. Quinlan

St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants, Inc. v. Fuji Photo Film Co., Ltd., et al., Civ. Act. No. 03-241-JJF, November 19, 2009.

Farnan, J. Plaintiff’s Motion For New Trial On Damages Pursuant To Fed.R.Civ.P. 59, Or In The Alternative, Motion For Prejudgment And Post-Judgment Interest will be denied to the extent a new trial is sought and granted to the extent that prejudgment and post-judgment interest is sought. In addition, Plaintiff’s Motion For A New Trial On Infringement will be denied because the Court has not modified it claim construction. The Final Judgment Order in this case will be amended to reflect the Court's prejudgment and post-judgment interest rulings.

Tags: Damages, Evidence, Farnan, Interest, JMOL/New Trial

Defendant's obvious and new trial motions are denied

Posted on November 13, 2009 by Amy A. Quinlan

Linear Technology Corporation v. Monolithic Power Systems, Inc., C.A. No. 06-476-GMS, November 12, 2009.

Sleet, C.J. The Court denies defendant’s post-trial motions that the patents-in-suit are obvious, or alternatively for a new trial.

Tags: Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Obviousness, Sleet

Plaintiff prevails on infringement and validity following bench trial

Posted on November 2, 2009 by Amy A. Quinlan

In re: Brimonidine Patent Litigation, MDL Docket No. 07-md-1866-GMS, October 23, 2009.

Sleet, C. J. The Court finds that the defendants' proposed generic products infringe the asserted claims of the patents-in-suit; (B) the patents-in-suit are not invalid; (C) the patents-in-suit are not unenforceable; and (D) an award for attorneys' fees and costs is not warranted in this case. The Court also grants the plaintiff's Rule 52(c) motion, and denies defendant’s Rule 52(c) motion.

Tags: Attorneys' Fees/Costs/Interest, Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Sleet

Jury verdict is adjusted after post-trial motions; new trial is denied

Posted on August 24, 2009 by Amy A. Quinlan

SRI International, Inc. v. Internet Security Systems, Inc., et al., Civ. No. 04-1199-SLR, August 20, 2009.

Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion for post-trial relief is denied. ISS’s motion for JMOL is granted in part and denied in part. Symantec’s motion for JMOL with respect to non-infringement by SGS and Manager Products is granted. Symantec’s motion for a new trial or to amend judgment is denied.

Tags: Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Obviousness, Robinson

Permanent injunction issues and Court awards enhanced damages

Posted on August 24, 2009 by Amy A. Quinlan

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.

Tags: Attorneys' Fees/Costs/Interest, Enhanced Damages, Equitable Defenses and Remedies, Exceptional Case/Willfulness, Infringement, Interest, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Prejudgment Interest, Remittitur, Sleet

Jury award is reduced from $52.3 to $44.9 to comport with the evidence

Posted on May 26, 2009 by Amy A. Quinlan

Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. v. Saint-Gobain Ceramics & Plastics, Inc., Civ. No. 07-190-SLR, May 15 , 2009.

Robinson J. Defendant’s motion for judgment as a matter of law or for a new trial and remittitur is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff’s motion for prejudgment interest is granted.

Tags: Attorneys' Fees/Costs/Interest, Damages, Infringement, JMOL/New Trial, Remittitur, Robinson

Jury verdict for willful infringement is upheld without enhanced damages

Posted on January 7, 2009 by Amy A. Quinlan

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.

Tags: Attorneys' Fees/Costs/Interest, Enhanced Damages, Equitable Defenses and Remedies, Exceptional Case/Willfulness, Infringement, Invalidity, Inventor Issues, JMOL/New Trial, Jury Issues/Instructions, Sleet

Damage award reduced by 82% on remittitur motion

Posted on December 17, 2008 by Amy A. Quinlan

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor, et al., Civ. No. 04-1371-JJF, December 12, 2008.

Farnan, J. Court grants in part defendant’s Motion for Remitter [sic], Judgment as a Matter of Law, or, in the Alternative for a New Trial on Damages to the extent that it requests a remittitur enters order reducing the damages awarded by 82%.

Tags: Damages, Farnan, JMOL/New Trial, Remittitur

Court orders retrial on willfulness in light of Seagate

Posted on December 16, 2008 by Amy A. Quinlan

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International,Inc. et al., Civ. No. 04-1371-JJF, December 12, 2008.

Farnan, J. Defendant's motion for a new trial on all issues in light of Seagate is granted to the extent it seeks a new trial on willfulness and denied to the extent it seeks a new trial on all issues.

Tags: Bifurcation/Phasing/Consolidation, Exceptional Case/Willfulness, Farnan, Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Jury Issues/Instructions

Stay of injunction pending appeal is denied

Posted on November 17, 2008 by Amy A. Quinlan

Callaway Golf Company v. Acushnet Company, Civ. No. 06-091-SLR, November 10, 2008.

Robinson, J. Defendant’s post-trial motion for JMOL or a new trial following jury verdict on validity is denied. Plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction is granted by separate order and stay of that order pending appeal is denied.

Tags: Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Robinson, Stay

$34 million verdict survives post trial challenge

Posted on November 14, 2008 by Amy A. Quinlan

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 04-1371-JJF, November 7, 2008.

Farnan, J. Defendants’ motion for judgment as a matter of law or for a new trial regarding invalidity of the patent-in-suit is denied.

Tags: Farnan, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial

JMOL on close question is denied

Posted on November 14, 2008 by Amy A. Quinlan

Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 04-1371-JJF, November 7, 2008.

Farnan, J. Defendants’ motion for JMOL of noninfringement and invalidity is denied.

Tags: Equitable Defenses and Remedies, Farnan, Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Obviousness

Court finds substantial evidence supports jury's verdict of infringement

Posted on October 21, 2008 by Amy A. Quinlan

Becton Dickinson and Company v. Tyco Healthcare Group LP, No. 02-1694-GMS, October 14, 2008.

Sleet, C.J. The Court denies defendant’s motion for judgment as a matter of law having ruled that substantial evidence was presented to support the jury’s infringement verdict.

Tags: Infringement, JMOL/New Trial, Sleet

Motions for new trial and JMOL on damages denied after remand.

Posted on September 29, 2008 by Amy A. Quinlan

Cordis Corp. v. Medtronic Vascular, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 97-550-SLR (Consolidated); Boston Scientific Corporation, et al. v. Ethicon, Inc., et al. C.A. No. 98-19-SLR, September 15, 2008.

Robinson, J. Following decade-long litigation, the Court grants Cordis’ motion for entry of final judgment and denies BSC’s motion for new trial and Medtronic’s motion for JMOL on lost profit damages.

Tags: Claim Construction, Damages, Infringement, Inventor Issues, JMOL/New Trial, Robinson

Damages remitted and enhanced 25% for willfulness; JMOL defenses waived

Posted on August 6, 2008 by Amy A. Quinlan

TruePosition Inc. v. Andrew Corporation, C.A. No. 05-747-SLR, July 31, 2008.

Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion for JMOL or a new trial is denied. Damages awarded by jury of $45.3 million are remitted to $18.6 million. Plaintiff’s motion for enhanced damages due to willful infringement is granted in part. Damages are enhanced by 25% to $23,250,000. Plaintiff’s motion for attorneys’ fees is denied. Plaintiff’s motion for a permanent injunction is granted. Prejudgment interest on $18.6 million is awarded, compounded quarterly at the prime rate. Post-judgment interest on $18.6 million from 9/19/07 (the date of judgment) is awarded at a rate equal to the weekly average 1-year constant maturity Treasury yield, as published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the calendar week preceding.

Tags: Damages, Equitable Defenses and Remedies, Estoppel/res judicata, Exceptional Case/Willfulness, Infringement, JMOL/New Trial, Robinson, Sanctions

Court issues contempt order against defendant for failure to abide by injunction

Posted on May 22, 2008 by Amy A. Quinlan

Fisher-Price, Inc. v. Safety 1st, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 01-051 GMS (May 5, 2008).

Sleet, C.J. Plaintiff’s motion for contempt of Court is granted in part; its post-trial motions for entry of final judgment, enhanced damages, attorneys fees and prejudgment interest are granted in part. Defendants’ motions for JMOL or a new trial as to willfulness and damages are denied

Tags: Attorneys' Fees/Costs/Interest, Exceptional Case/Willfulness, Infringement, JMOL/New Trial, Sanctions, Sleet

Defendant is enjoined from marketing its DHA products

Posted on December 5, 2007 by Amy A. Quinlan

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.

Tags: Daubert/Experts, Equitable Defenses and Remedies, Estoppel/res judicata, Exceptional Case/Willfulness, Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Waiver

JMOL and new trial requests are denied

Posted on October 16, 2007 by Amy A. Quinlan

Cordis Corporation v. Boston Scientific Corporation, et al., C.A. Nos. 03-027-SLR and 03-283-SLR, September 24, 2007.

Robinson, J. Cordis’ motion for judgment as a matter of law or for a new trial is denied.

Tags: JMOL/New Trial

JMOL and new trial were denied in stent case

Posted on April 18, 2007 by Amy A. Quinlan

Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. et al. v. Medtronic Vascular, Inc. et al., No. 98-80-SLR, Mar. 29, 2007.

Robinson, J. Defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law of non-infringement and invalidity and motion for a new trial were denied.

Continue Reading...

Tags: Claim Construction, Infringement, Invalidity, Inventor Issues, JMOL/New Trial, Motion to Strike/Preclude, Real Party in Interest/Standing/Agency

Verdict of DOE infringement withstands reconsideration motion

Posted on April 18, 2007 by Amy A. Quinlan

Cordis Corp. v. Boston Scientific Corp. et al, No. 03-027-SLR, Mar. 27, 2007.

Robinson, J. Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration in stent case was denied.

Continue Reading...

Tags: Infringement, JMOL/New Trial, Reconsideration/Reargument

Defense tactics result in denial of JMOL and new trial motions

Posted on April 10, 2007 by Amy A. Quinlan

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...

Tags: Claim Construction, Discovery, Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Motion to Strike/Preclude

JMOL and new trial were denied as the court awarded enhanced damages

Posted on March 13, 2007 by Amy A. Quinlan

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.

Tags: Attorneys' Fees/Costs/Interest, Damages, Equitable Defenses and Remedies, Exceptional Case/Willfulness, Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial

New trial and JMOL on infringement and invalidity were denied

Posted on January 18, 2007 by Amy A. Quinlan

Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. et al. v. Cordis Corp. et al., No. 03-283-SLR, June 15, 2006.

Robinson, J. Defendants’ motion for JMOL or new trial on infringement and invalidity is denied. Defendants’ motion to strike portions of plaintiffs’ reply brief is granted in part and denied in part. New arguments are stricken.

Continue Reading...

Tags: Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial, Motion to Strike/Preclude

JMOL and new trial motions denied after verdict of infringement and nonobviousness following remand

Posted on January 17, 2007 by Amy A. Quinlan

Cordis Corporation v. Boston Scientific Corp. et al., Cons. C.A. 97-550-SLR, May 16, 2006 (corrected).

Robinson, J. Medtronic’s motion for new trial on Cordis’ patent infringement claims and Medtronic’s invalidity counter-claims, and Medtronic’s motion for JMOL on infringement are denied.

Continue Reading...

Tags: Claim Construction, Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial

Jury verdicts against both parties stand as JMOL is refused

Posted on January 16, 2007 by Amy A. Quinlan

Cordis Corporation v. Boston Scientific Corp., et al., No. 03-027-SLR, May 11, 2006.

Robinson, J. Juries found for plaintiff against defendants in separate trials. Defendants’ motions for JMOL are denied. Plaintiff’s motion for JMOL or new trial on infringement and invalidity of ‘021 patent is denied. BSC’s motion for reconsideration of the “without prejudice” aspect of order dismissing claims against one product is denied.

Tags: Bifurcation/Phasing/Consolidation, Infringement, Invalidity, JMOL/New Trial

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

Published By
Morris James LLP

Short tagline goes here

JMOL granted on certain infringement and validity claims

Defendants' JMOL bid fails

JMOL and new trial are denied on noninfringement claims

JMOL as to adequate written description and no anticipation is granted

Court upholds noninfringement verdict, grants JMOL as to invalidity

New trial application fails; pre and post judgment interest is awarded

Defendant's obvious and new trial motions are denied

Plaintiff prevails on infringement and validity following bench trial

Jury verdict is adjusted after post-trial motions; new trial is denied

Permanent injunction issues and Court awards enhanced damages

Jury award is reduced from $52.3 to $44.9 to comport with the evidence

Jury verdict for willful infringement is upheld without enhanced damages

Damage award reduced by 82% on remittitur motion

Court orders retrial on willfulness in light of Seagate

Stay of injunction pending appeal is denied

$34 million verdict survives post trial challenge

JMOL on close question is denied

Court finds substantial evidence supports jury's verdict of infringement

Motions for new trial and JMOL on damages denied after remand.

Damages remitted and enhanced 25% for willfulness; JMOL defenses waived

Court issues contempt order against defendant for failure to abide by injunction

Defendant is enjoined from marketing its DHA products

JMOL and new trial requests are denied

JMOL and new trial were denied in stent case

Verdict of DOE infringement withstands reconsideration motion

Defense tactics result in denial of JMOL and new trial motions

JMOL and new trial were denied as the court awarded enhanced damages

New trial and JMOL on infringement and invalidity were denied

JMOL and new trial motions denied after verdict of infringement and nonobviousness following remand

Jury verdicts against both parties stand as JMOL is refused