Close

Articles Posted in N.D. California

Updated:

Patent Claims for Prenatal Diagnostic Method Invalidated as Ineligible Subject Matter

Method Claims Applying Conventional Techniques to a Natural Phenomenon Held to be Patent Ineligible Subject Matter By Ali Shalchi The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California found Sequenom’s patent claims on a prenatal diagnostic method to be invalid and not infringed by Arisoa Diagnostic’s Harmony Test product,…

Updated:

Apple v. Samsung: Samsung’s Request for Stay of Discovery Orders Denied Where Magistrate Judge Made No Ruling on Privilege Issues and the Scope of the Compelled Information Was Not Overly Broad

As a result of Samsung’s alleged violation of the protective order, Magistrate Judge Grewal previously ordered Samsung to produce to Apple emails and communications by Samsung employees that would shed light on the scope of the alleged protective order violation and to make available for deposition various witnesses by October…

Updated:

Voluntary Work Held to be Work for Hire in World of Warcraft Suit

by Ali Shalchi In Lewis v. Activision Blizzard, Inc., No. 4:12-cv-01096-CW (N.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2013), an employee of Blizzard brought suit against the company for copyright infringement, alleging ownership of voiceover work used in the popular World of Warcraft online video game. The key issue on Blizzard’s motion for…

Updated:

Apple v. Samsung: Court Orders Investigation into Potential Protective Order Violation by Samsung

As Apple and Samsung head toward yet another trial, Apple filed a motion for sanctions, accusing Samsung of violating the protective order in the case. Apple’s motion asserted that Samsung’s counsel had improperly shared information under the protective order with executives at Samsung. The court began its analysis with a…

Updated:

Damage Expert Stricken without Leave to Amend after District Court Determines That Expert Over Reached by Using Entire Market Value Rule

As this patent infringement action moved closer to trial, the parties filed various motions in limine, including defendant Fortinet Inc.’s motion to strike the report and expert testimony of Network Protection Sciences, LLC’s (“NPS”) damage expert. In its motion to strike, Fortinet contended that the damage expert’s analysis improperly based…

Updated:

Daubert Motion to Strike Expert Testimony Denied Where Lump Sum Royalty Was Not Improperly Based on Total Market Value of Accused Products

In this patent infringement action, the patent owner sought a reasonable royalty in the form of a lump sum payment. HTC filed a Daubert motion to exclude the expert’s opinion on the ground that the lump sum royalty impermissibly included the entire market value. The district court began its analysis…

Updated:

Motion to Amend Infringement Contentions Denied Where Plaintiff Waited Too Long After Claim Construction Ruling

Plaintiff Power Integrations, Inc. (“Power Integrations” or “PI”) filed a patent infringement action against Defendants Fairchild Semiconductor Int’l, Inc., Fairchild Semiconductor Corp. (collectively, “Fairchild”) and System General Corp. (“System General”). Power Integrations is a manufacturer of power conversion integrated circuit devices, which are used in power supplies for electronic devices…

Updated:

Emblaze v. Apple: Court Orders Parties to Meet and Confer Over Motion to Compel After Emblaze Fails to Justify How Apple’s Search Terms Were Unduly Burdensome

In this patent infringement action, Apple moved to compel production from Emblaze based on search terms that Apple provided. Emblaze opposed the motion, arguing that it had produced all responsive documents, that Apple’s requests were overbroad and that using Apple’s search terms would be unduly burdensome. The court began its…

Updated:

Defendant Precluded from Deposing Plaintiff’s Expert Twice, Once After the Initial Expert Reports and Again After Rebuttal Reports

Plaintiff ProconGPS, Inc. (“Procon”) filed a patent infringement action against Skypatrol, LLC (“Skypatrol”). During the expert phase of the case, a dispute arose over the deposition of plaintiff’s experts. The parties disputed whether Skypatrol should be permitted to depose plaintiffs’ experts twice, once after Procon’s initial expert report and again…

Updated:

Motion to Exclude Advice of Counsel Granted Where Defendant Sought to Rely on Pre-Investigation Advice on Cease and Desist Letter While Preventing Discovery of Advice

Volterra Semiconductor (“Volterra”) filed a motion to prevent Primarion from offering evidence regarding the subjective prong of the Seagate test on willful infringement. See In re Seagate Technology, LLC 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2007). As explained by the district court, “Volterra argues that Primarion’s Seventh Supplemental Responses to Volterra’s…

Contact Us