The following four decisions were reported in patent cases pending in the Central District of California for the period of March 18 through March 29, 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…
The following eighteen decisions were reported in patent cases pending in the Central District of California for the period of March 1 through March 15, 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…
The following nine decisions were reported in patent cases pending in the Central District of California for the period of February 16 through February 28, 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…
The following fourteen decisions were reported in patent cases pending in the Central District of California for the period of February 1 through February 15, 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…
In this patent infringement action, Vinotemp International (“Vinotemp”) brought suit against Wine Master Cellars, LLP (“Wine Master”). Wine Master filed a counterclaim for patent infringement. Prior to trial, Vinotemp moved to preclude Wine Master from offering evidence of damages at trial. As explained by the district court, “Vinotemp moves to…
In Arrival Star S.A.., et al. -v- Meitek Inc., et al., Defendant Meitek Inc. (“Meitek”) moved for Rule 11 sanctions against the Plaintiff Arrival Star S.A. (“Arrival Star”) based on Meitek’s contentions that “ArrivalStar’s counsel (1) failed to prepare any claim construction before filing suit, (2) made a “tactical decision”…
The following ten decisions were reported in patent cases pending in the Central District of California for the period of January 14 through January 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…
The following six decisions in patent cases pending in the Central District of California were reported for the period of January 1 through January 11, 2013. DATE CASE AND HOLDING JUDGE MOTION TYPE 1/2/2013 The Tawnsaura Group, LLC v. Maximum Human Performance, LLC, 2-12-cv-07189 Otero Dismiss The court denied defendants’…
CSR Technology, Inc. (“CSR”) filed a patent infringement action against Bandspeed, Inc. (“Bandspeed”) for infringement of its signal processing patents. After the district court issued its claim construction ruling, Bandspeed moved for summary judgment. As the district court explained, “[t]he ‘771 and ‘886 patents relate to signal detection and acquisition…
Earlier this summer, the district court enjoined Samsung from “making, using, offering to sell, or selling within the United States, or importing into the United States, Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet computer, and any product that is no more than colorably different from this specified product and embodies any design…