In this patent infringement action, the district court concluded that the parties were over-litigating the case and matters were only getting worse as trial got closer. “The Court’s previously stated concern that the parties are over-litigating this case is growing. 18 motions in limine were filed, and 15 were denied.…
Articles Posted in C.D. California
NetAirus v. Apple: District Court Strikes Survey Expert Where Survey Expert’s Methodology Made No Effort to Shield Respondents from Study Goals and Included Both Owners and Prospective Purchasers as Respondents
In this patent infringement action, Plaintiff NetAirus Technologies, LLC (“NetAirus”) asserted that Apple infringes U.S. Patent No. 7,103,380 (the “‘380 Patent”). The ‘380 Patent claims methods in which a “handset unit [ ] configured to a personal digital assistant (PDA)” wirelessly communicates over both a local area network (“LAN”) and…
Covenant Not to Sue Does Not Prevent Finding of Exceptional Case and Award of Attorneys’ Fees Where Adverse Determinations Were Already Made
Plaintiffs Kim Laube & Co. (“Laube”) brought this patent infringement action against Defendant Wahl Clipper Corp. (“Wahl”) for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,473,973 (“the ‘973 Patent”), which is titled “Disposable Cutting Head for Clippers.” After jury and bench trials, Laube filed a motion dismiss all patent related claims and…
District Court Sua Sponte Orders Claims for Indirect Infringement and Willfulness Dismissed for Failure to Plead Pre-Suit Knowledge of Patent
Eclipse IP LLC (“Eclipse”) filed several patent infringement actions against a number of defendants, in which it alleged indirect infringement (both inducing and contributory) as well as willfulness. The district court sua sponte issued an order regarding the indirect infringement claims as well as the willfulness allegations. The district court…
Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Amend Invalidity Contentions Denied Where Defendant Disclosed Prior Art to Plaintiff But Waited Four Months to File Motion for Leave to Amend
Defendant Green Max Distributors, Inc. (“Green Max”) filed a motion for leave to amend its invalidity contentions. In the motion, Green Max sought to add photos, publications, and prior-art references to its original invalidity contentions. These additional references included additional photos that “more clearly and from different angles” depicted the…
Patent Case Rulings from the Central District of California: Apr. 1 to Apr. 30, 2013
The following 36 decisions were reported in patent cases pending in the Central District of California for the period of April 1 through April 30, 2013. The authors of www.PatentLawyerBlog.com are patent trial lawyers at Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP. We represent inventors, patent owners and technology companies in…
Patent Case Rulings from the Central District of California: May 1 to May 31, 2013
The following twenty decisions were reported in patent cases pending in the Central District of California for the period of May 1 through May 31, 2013. The authors of www.PatentLawyerBlog.com are patent trial lawyers at Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP. We represent inventors, patent owners and technology companies in…
Counterclaims for Declaratory Judgment for Non-Infringement and Invalidity Dismissed as Duplicative of Infringement Complaint and Failure to Plead Any Facts Describing How the Patent Was Invalid
Plaintiff, The Sliding Door Company (“Sliding Door”), brought an action for patent infringement against KLS Doors, LLC (“KLS Doors”) alleging infringement of a patent for a sliding door system. KLS Doors filed a counterclaim for declaratory judgment for, among other things, that it did not infringe the patent and that…
Stay Pending Inter Partes Review Denied Because Defendant Waited Too Long to File the Petition and Court Had Dedicated Resources to Determining Claim Construction
Defendant Universal Remote Control, Inc. (“Universal Remote”) filed a motion to stay a patent infringement action filed by Universal Electronics, Inc. (“Universal Electronics”) pending an Inter Partes Review in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”). Universal Remote and Universal Electronics are competitors in the universal remote control business.…
Assignment Agreement That Failed to Specifically Address Right to Sue for Past Damages Held Insufficient on Summary Judgment; Summary Judgment Granted to Limit Damages to Period After Patent Was Acquired
Plaintiff Nano-Second Technology filed a patent infringement action against Dynaflex International, GForce Corporation, d/b/a/ DFX Sports & Fitness. As part of the patent infringement action, Nano-Second alleged “that Defendants have infringed upon its ‘311 Patent by selling, importing, making, offering, or using wrists exercisers (“Accused Products”) that fall within the…