Plaintiff Gen-Probe Incorporated (“Gen-Probe”) filed a patent infringement action against Becton Dickinson & Company (“Becton Dickinson”) alleging infringement of its Automation and Cap patents. The Automation patents resulted from Gen-Probe’s development of a single automated instrument to detect a target nucleic acid indicative of the presence of a target pathogen…
Articles Posted in District Courts
Covenant Not to Sue Blocks Declaratory Judgment Action Seeking to Invalidate Patent
The plaintiff, Mytee Products, Inc. (“Mytee”) manufactures and sells a sealing fan under the name Tradewind. Defendants Studebaker Enterprises, Inc. (“Studebaker”) and Dri-Eaz Products, Inc. (“Dri-Eaz”) were assigned ownership rights in the patents-in-suit, which are both entitled “Shrouded Floor Drying Fan.” Another of the defendants, Skagit Northwest Holdings, Inc. (“Skagit”)…
Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd – Apple’s landslide victory over Samsung in a US District Court does not mark the end of the so called smart phone ‘patent wars’
This article was first published in Vol. 12, Issue 4 of E-Commerce Law Reports and is reprinted with permission. As the smart phone wars continue to rage across the world, the verdict in the Apple v. Samsung case is the latest battle to end, at least for now, in favor…
Freddie Mac Proves Patent Invalid on Motion to Dismiss That Is Converted into a Summary Judgment Motion for Claiming Unpatentable Subject Matter
Graff/Ross Holdings LLP (“Graff/Ross”) filed a patent infringement action against the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”) for patent infringement. Freddie Mac moved to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) on the ground that the patent was invalid for claiming unpatentable subject matter. The district court referred the motion to…
Court Strikes Demand for Jury Trial Where Claims at Issue Focused Solely on Validity of Patents
Plaintiff Abbott Laboratories and Abbott Biotechnology Limited (“Abbott”) filed a declaratory judgment action that defendant’s patent was invalid. After the defendant demand a jury trial, Abbott moved to strike the defendant’s demand for a jury trial on the issue of patent validity. As the district court explained, “[t]he parties agree…
Motion to Dismiss Patent Infringement Complaint Granted Where Complaint Used the Phrase “At Least” to Claim More Than Products Identified in Complaint
Radiation Stabilization Solutions (“RSS”) filed a patent infringement action against Varian Medical Systems, Inc. (“Varian”) and several hospitals. The hospitals moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the allegations were inadequate under Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662…
Counterclaim for Invalidity Dismissed Even Though It Complied with Form 18 Because It Contained Conclusory Allegations
Plaintiff Wisconsin Technology Venture Group, LLC (“Wisconsin Technology”) contended that Fatwallet, Inc. (“Fatwallet”) infringed its patent pertaining to Internet technology. Fatwallet filed several affirmative defenses, as well as counterclaims for invalidity and non-infringement of the patent-in-suit. Wisconsin Technology moved to dismiss the counterclaims under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) for defendant’s failure to…
WiFi “Sniffing” Ruled Not a Violation of the Wiretap Act Where Patent Holder Sought to Collect Information That Was Available over Public WiFi Networks
Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC (“Innovatio”) filed patent infringement actions against various hotels, coffee shops, restaurants and supermarkets for the use of wireless Internet technology located throughout the United States. Innovatio filed a motion for entry of a protocol for collection of electronic evidence and a preliminary ruling on the admissibility…
Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Denied Even Though Defendant Contended that Patent Infringement Claim Contradicted the Specification of the Patent-In-Suit
Intendis, Inc. (“Intendis”) and Dow Pharmaceutical Sciences, Inc. (“Dow”) filed a patent infringement action against River’s Edge Pharmaceuticals, LLC (“River’s Edge”). Dow owns the patent-in-suit and Intendis is the exclusive licensee. According to the district court, “[t]he ‘383 patent is listed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as covering…
AT&T Mobility Successfully Dismisses Claims for Direct Equivalent Infringement and Indirect Infringement
Plaintiff filed a patent infringement action again AT&T Mobility LLC (“AT&T Mobility”) for “either literally or by equivalents, and either directly or by inducement or contribution” infringing the patent-in-suit. AT&T moved to dismiss. AT&T made three arguments in its motion. First, AT&T argued that the plaintiff’s claims should be dismissed…