Close

Patent Lawyer Blog

Updated:

I/P Engine v. Google: Motion for Ongoing Royalty Granted Even Though Plaintiff Could Not Prove Entitlement to Permanent Injunctive Relief

I/P Engine, Inc. (“I/P Engine”) filed a complaint against AOL, Inc., Google, Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., Gannett Company, Inc. and Target Corporation (collectively “Defendants”) in which I/P Engine alleged that the Defendants infringed several of its patents. After a jury trial, the jury reached a verdict finding that…

Updated:

Tomita v. Nintendo: Remittitur or New Trial Ordered on $30M Damage Verdict Where Jury Likely Weighed Profitability of Games Rather Than the Profitability of the Accused Device

Tomita Technologies USA, LLC (“Tomita”) won a jury verdict of $30M against Nintendo in patent infringement action. The jury found that Nintendo’s 3DS infringed the patent-in-suit (the ‘664 patent) and that the ‘664 patent was not invalid. Nintendo filed several post-trial motions, including a motion for a remittitur of the…

Updated:

Stay Pending Inter Partes Review Granted Even Where Defendant Seeking Stay Had Not Initiated the Review

Plaintiff e-Watch, Inc. filed a patent infringement action against several defendants, including Defendant FLIR Systems, Inc. (“FLIR”). FLIR filed a motion to stay pending an inter partes review of the patent-in-suit by the Patent Office. In deciding to grant the stay, the district court noted that the action was at…

Updated:

Patent Acquisition Bar Precluding Plaintiff’s Counsel from Advising Any Clients on the Acquisition of Patents Granted Where Defendant Was Disclosing “Crown Jewel” Technology

In this patent infringement action, Defendant Sirius XM Radio, Inc. (“Sirius”) sought a “patent acquisition bar” against plaintiff’s counsel from Freitas Tseng & Kaufman, LLP (“Freitas”). In seeking the bar, Sirius asserted that the Freitas attorneys who would gain access to Sirius’ confidential technical information should be barred from advising…

Updated:

Motion for Leave to Amend Infringement Contentions Denied Where Plaintiff Sought to Add Thousands of New Products

Plaintiff Keranos, LLC (“Keranos”) alleged that Silicon Storage Technology (“Silicon Storage”) and other defendants infringed three related patents by manufacturing certain flash memory products. Keranos sought leave to amend its infringement contentions to add additional products that the defendants disclosed during discovery. As explained by the district court, the Eastern…

Updated:

Motion to Strike Expert Testimony Granted to Preclude Expert’s “Logic Analysis” to Determine the Physical Structure of a Circuit but Expert Permitted to Opine That Logic of Accused Circuit Corresponds to Patent

Plaintiff Cobra International, Inc. (“Cobra”) filed a patent infringement action against several defendants, including BCNY International (“BCNY”) alleging infringement of a patent for the design of lighted footwear. The defendants create children’s shoes that have a small electrical module with an integrated circuit mounted on a chip. As explained by…

Updated:

Plaintiff Allowed to Amend Complaint to Include Willful Infringement Based on Allegation That Defendant Continued to Sell Infringing Products after Learning of Patent Through Service of Original Complaint

Englishtown, Inc. (“Englishtown”) filed a patent infringement action against Rosetta Stone, Inc. (“Rosetta Stone”) for alleged infringement of patents pertaining to language-learning products, software, online services and practice tools. Englishtown sought leave to amend its complaint to include an allegation of willfulness based solely on post-litigation knowledge and conduct. Rosetta…

Updated:

Declaratory Judgment Jurisdiction Found Where Patent License Negotiations Reached an Impasse and NDA Did Not Preclude a Lawsuit

Plaintiff Biomet, Inc. (“Biomet”) filed a complaint for Declaratory Judgment against Bonutti Skeletal Innovations, LLC (“Bonutti”) seeking a declaration that the manufacture, use, or sale of Biomet’s products does not infringe on Bonutti’s patents. Bonutti filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R.…

Updated:

Disclosure of Opinions of Counsel to Customers Waived Privilege as to the Opinions and the Subject Matter of the Opinions

Plaintiff The Procter & Gamble Company (“Plaintiff”) filed a patent infringement action against Clio USA, Inc. (“Clio”). Plaintiff moved to compel certain opinions of counsel and other documents concerning the subject matter of those opinions. In the litigation, Clio had produced to Plaintiff copies of two abridged opinions, which were…

Updated:

Adobe Moved to Disqualify Opposing Counsel Where Counsel Had Done Opinion Work and Had Never Sent a Letter Terminating the Relationship Before It Took Matter Adverse to Adobe

Plaintiff TQP Development, LLC (“TQP”) filed a patent infringement action against Adobe Systems Incorporated (“Adobe”). TQP was represented by the law firm of Russ August & Kabat in the action against Adobe (“RAK”). Based on the fact that RAK had previously represented Adobe in opinion work, Adobe moved to disqualify…

Contact Us