Close

Articles Posted in District Courts

Updated:

When Plaintiffs Exit Market and Are No Longer Direct Competitor of Defendants Stay Pending Reexamination Is Justified as Plaintiffs Can No Longer Show Prejudice: Wyeth v. Abbott Laboratories

In this patent action, Defendants filed a renewed motion to the stay the proceedings pending an inter partes reexamination of the patents-in-suit. The district court had previously denied a similar motion over a year earlier. In the renewed motion, the Defendants contended that circumstances had changed since the district court’s…

Updated:

The Battle Over Android, Oracle v. Google: Google Is Ordered to “Stand and Deliver” or Withdraw Its Patent Marking Defense

In a previous ruling in the ongoing lawsuit between Oracle and Google over Android, the district court denied Google’s motion for partial summary judgment on a defense of patent marking. In that ruling, the district court expressed concern that disputes over whether Oracle or Sun products practiced the asserted claims…

Updated:

Inventor’s Toy Glider Infringement Action Crashes to the Ground When Plaintiff Fails to Refute Evidence on Summary Judgment

Plaintiff was the inventor of a toy glider and was issued a patent in 1992. Plaintiff formed a partnership called Wingers Co. After forming Wingers, Plaintiff then sent a letter to the defendant introducing the toy glider and ultimately an agreement was entered into between Allied (the defendant), Wingers Co.…

Updated:

Judge Posner Grants Motorola’s Summary Judgment Motion of Non-Infringement for Android: Apple v. Motorola

In Apple’s patent infringement action against Motorola, Apple claimed that certain Motorola devices running the Android operating system infringe two of its network component patents. Motorola moved for summary judgment. According to the district court, “Claim 1 of the ‘486 patent describes ‘replaceable…component’s]’ in a layered computing system. (The ‘852…

Updated:

Court Orders Depositions in Taiwan to Overcome Procedural Obstacles in Japan

Plaintiff Gerber Scientific International (“Gerber”) filed a patent infringement action against Roland DGA Corporation (“Roland”), asserting that Roland infringed Gerber’s patent covering a method and apparatus for computerized graphic production. Roland filed a motion for protective order with respect to the depositions of three of its Japanese employees and its…

Updated:

Taser’s Contempt Motion Denied Where Colorable Differences Existed Between Infringing Product and Newly Accused Product

After the district court found that defendant’s electronic control device literally infringed certain claims of a patent owned by Taser and denied defendant’s summary judgment motion on defendant’s claims of invalidity and unenforceability, Taser filed a motion for contempt and an application for an order to show cause. In its…

Updated:

Court Sinks Two Moms and a Toy’s Attempt to Modify Expert Schedule in Patent Battle over Bath Toy

Plaintiff, Two Moms and a Toy, filed an emergency motion to stay the expert phase of their case pending the court’s ruling on claim construction. The plaintiff’s motion was based on the argument that “expert reports and expert discovery in a patent infringement case is extremely expensive and that a…

Updated:

Court Allows Deposition of Trial Counsel Over His Pre-Filing Investigation

Defendant moved to compel the deposition of a member of Plaintiff ‘s trial counsel regarding Plaintiff’s pre-filing investigation. Despite Defendant’s attempt to withdraw the motion based on a representation (not disclosed in the opinion) made by the Plaintiff in its sur-reply, the Court granted the Defendant’s motion and required the…

Updated:

Motion to Dismiss Granted Where Complaint Failed to Allege That One Party Performed Each Step of Method Claim

Defendants moved to dismiss a patent infringement complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) on the theory that the complaint failed to allege facts showing that a single party performed each and every limitation of the method claim. The district court noted that “the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has ‘instructed that…

Updated:

Verizon’s Inequitable Conduct Defense Survives Challenge

In a patent case filed in the Eastern District of Texas by Eon Corporation IP Holdings, LLC (“Eon”) against Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless (“Verizon”), along with other defendants, Eon moved to dismiss Verizon’s inequitable conduct counterclaims and strike its inequitable conduct affirmative defenses. Magistrate Judge Love recommended that Eon’s…

Contact Us