In Re: Rembrandt Technologies, LP Patent Litigation, MDL Docket No. 07-1848-GMS-LPS, June 29, 2009.
Stark, M.J. A motion to amend complaint filed by equipment vendors is granted. The Magistrate Judge further recommends that Rembrandt’s motion to strike or dismiss antitrust counter-counterclaims be denied as moot; and a motion for judgment on the pleadings relating to certain claims filed by the cable defendants be denied.
Continue Reading...Alza Corporation and McNeil-PPC, Inc. v. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, LLC, et al., Civil Action No. 05-642-JJF, March 30, 2009.
Farnan J. Defendants' declaratory judgment counterclaims pertaining to one of the patents are dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiffs’ Motion To Strike Portions of Defendants' Post-Trial Findings of Fact is granted and Defendants' Contingent Cross Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiffs' Post-Trial Findings Of Fact and Conclusions of Law is denied. In addition the Court finds the remaining patent-in-suit to be both invalid and not infringed.
Continue Reading...Symbol Technologies, Inc. et al. v. Aruba Networks, Inc., C.A. No. 07-519-JJF, March 30, 2009.
Farnan, J. Plaintiffs’ motion to strike certain portions of the defendant’s answer and counterclaim is granted in part.
Continue Reading...Takeda Pharmaceuticals Company, Ltd., et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Civ. No. 07-331-SLR, March 4, 2009.
Robinson, J. This matter arises as a pretrial evidentiary dispute
Continue Reading...Medtronic, Inc. v. Boston Scientific Corporation, et al., C. A. No. 07-823-GMS, November 21, 2008.
Stark, M. J. Motion to dismiss or in the alternative to transfer defendant’s counterclaim is denied. Court grants defendant’s motion to strike plaintiff’s jury demand.
Continue Reading...Honeywell International, Inc., et al. v. Universal Avionics Systems Corp., et al., C.A. No. 02-359-MPT, November 12, 2008.
Thynge, M.J. Defendants’ motion to preclude plaintiff from relitigating lost profits based on issue preclusion is granted. Defendant Universal’s motion to preclude lost profits based on double recovery, judicial estoppel and/or implied license is moot. Defendants’ motion for reconsideration is denied.
Continue Reading...Sepracor Inc. v. Dey, L.P. and Dey, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 06-113-JJF, September 26, 2008.
Farnan, J. Court grants defendants’ motion to strike plaintiff’s willfulness allegations but preserves plaintiff’s exceptional case claim.
Continue Reading...Robinson, J. Motion to exclude certain expert testimony is granted. Motion to strike affirmative defense of estoppel is deferred.
Continue Reading...Farnan J. Court rules on certain evidentiary issues raised by both parties during bench trial and denies all objections.
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...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.
Robinson, C.J. Cordis’ renewed motion for summary judgment of non-infringement was granted. Plaintiffs’ motion to exclude evidence of testing by Cordis’ expert Dr. Sabatini and related testimony was denied. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment of validity due to no anticipation was granted.
Continue Reading...SRI International Inc. v. Internet Security Systems, Inc. et al., No. 04-1199-SLR, Oct. 17, 2006.
Robinson, J. Defendants’ motions for summary judgment of invalidity are granted. Plaintiff’s motion regarding no anticipation is denied as moot. Defendants’ motion for failure to disclose best mode is denied as moot.
Continue Reading...
Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int’l, Inc., No. 04-1371–JJF Sept. 20, 2006.
Farnan, J. Court grants 3 of 19 motions in limine filed by defendants, and 1 1/2 out of 5 motions filed by plaintiff.
Forest Laboratories, Inc. v. Ivex Pharmaceuticals, Inc., No. 03-891-JJF July 25, 2006.
Farnan, J. After a bench trial, the court sustained about 10 out of 30 evidentiary objections after post-trial briefing.
Continue Reading...
McKesson Information Solutions LLC v. The Trizetto Group, Inc., No. 04-1258-SLR, Apr. 17, 2006.
Robinson, J. Pretrial order regarding disputed deposition designations.
Padcom, Inc. v. Netmotion Wireless, Inc., No. 03-983-SLR, Mar. 8, 2006.
Robinson, J. Motion for reconsideration granted. Various requests for clarification are addressed.
Enter keywords:
For more information concerning any of these cases, contact Mary Matterer at mmatterer@morrisjames.com or 302.888.6960
