In this patent infringement action, the plaintiff, Personalized Media Communications, LLC (“PMC”), moved to exclude the testimony of Apple’s damages expert, Mr. Thomas. In rebuttal, Mr. Thomas estimated that PMC would be entitled to a lump-sum payment of $1 million per allegedly infringing patent. PMC asserted that Mr. Thomas’ damages…
A common refrain is that an invention is only as valuable as the patent that protects it. But what happens when you cannot secure the patent? This is a frequent hurdle for inventors seeking to patent products utilizing artificial intelligence (AI). While still in its infancy, at least compared to…
Plaintiff All Plastic contended it was a leading manufacturer of premium displays and containers for medicinal and recreational cannabis dispensaries. All Plastic filed a patent infringement action against Defendants SamDan LLC d/b/a Smokus Focus (“SamDan”), Samuel Whetsel (“Mr. Whetsel”), and Daniel Russell-Einhorn (“Mr. Russell-Einhorn”) (with Mr. Whetsel, “Individual Defendants” and…
On March 2, Stan Gibson will host a free webinar exploring the issue of false advertising, how it can harm your company, and how you can resolve problems resulting from competitors’ misleading statements. Details on the program and a sign-up link are below. Please join us! How to Defend Your…
Plaintiff Baxter International (“Baxter”) sued CareFusion Corporation and Becton, Dickson and Company (“Defendants”) for infringement of three medical infusion pump patents, U.S. Patent Nos. 5,764,034 (the ‘034 Patent), 5,782,805 (the ‘805 Patent), and 6,231,560 (the ‘560 Patent). Baxter moved to strike portions of the Defendants’ invalidity expert, including asserting that…
Read our update on Stan’s 4x4x48 Challenge here. Next month, Stan Gibson, Chairman of JMBM’s Patent Litigation Group, will run the 4x4x48 for the Special Operations Warrior Foundation. Read his message below. Like many of you, I have wondered what I can do to help our country and the people…
In this patent infringement action, the defendant moved to compel the production of settlement license agreements as part of its reasonable royalty analysis. The plaintiff opposed the request on the grounds that the agreements were protected by the common interest privilege and were not relevant. The district court disagreed. Turning…
In this patent infringement action, the City of Hope filed a motion for summary judgment. The district court denied the motion without prejudice for failing to comply with the Local Rules meet and confer requirement. Central District Local Rule 7-3 provides that “counsel contemplating the filing of any motion shall…
As explained by the district court, Zadro Products, Inc. (“Zadro”) sued Feit Electric Company (“Feit”) for patent infringement alleging that Feit infringed on two of Zadro’s patents: United States Patent No. 8,162,502 (“the ’502 Patent”) and United States Patent No. 8,356,908 (“the ’908 Patent”). Zadro alleged that one of Feit’s…
In a decision published on April 27, 2020, the United States Patent and Trademark Office determined that only a human can be considered an inventor. So, who owns the patent when artificial intelligence makes the invention? What are the practical and logistical complications inherent in artificial intelligence-created inventions? With technology…