Plaintiff Tyco Healthcare Group and United States Surgical Corporation moved to disqualify defendant Ethicon Endo-Surgery’s attorneys of record (the law firm of Akin Gump). Tyco based the motion to disqualify on the ground that Akin Gump had improper access to privileged and confidential information of Tyco because Akin Gump hired…
Patent Lawyer Blog
The District of Massachusetts Recognizes the Need For More Courtroom and Trial Experience for Relatively Inexperienced Attorneys
In an effort to encourage more participation from less experienced attorneys, the District of Massachusetts has several judges adopting standing orders that strongly encourage the participation of relatively inexperienced attorneys. Judge Casper is the most recent judge in the District of Massachusetts to adopt such a standing order. Judge Casper…
Court Grants TiVo’s Motion to Compel Clawed Back E-Mail and Sanctions Defendant AT&T For Failing to Justify That E-Mail Was Privileged
Plaintiff TiVo brought an emergency motion to compel production of an e-mail that defendant AT&T produced and then clawed back pursuant to a protective order agreed to by the parties. During a deposition, TiVo marked an e-mail as an exhibit and questioned the deponent for several minutes about the e-mail…
Motion to Lift Stay Pending Inter Partes Reexamination Denied Where Reexamination Was Not Complete
The district court issued a stay pending reexamination of an inter partes reexamination of the patent at issue in the litigation. Plaintiff filed a motion to lift the district court’s stay pending re-examination based on the argument that the reexamination was nearly complete because an office action had issued invalidating…
Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment of No Inequitable Conduct Granted Where Merely Failing to Provide References Insufficient to Establish Specific Intent to Deceive Patent and Trademark Office
The parties filed cross-motions for summary on the issue of inequitable conduct. The district court had previously denied summary judgment motions on the issue of inequitable conduct but that was prior to the Federal Circuit’s decision in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton Dickinson and Co., 649 F.3d 1276 (Fed. Circ. 2011)…
Multidistrict Panel Transfers Patent Cases Pending in District Courts in Texas and Delaware to the District of Maryland Even Though No Cases Were Pending in Maryland
Defendants in two Eastern District of Texas actions moved to centralize their cases in the District of Delaware or in another transferee forum. Three actions involving the same plaintiff and patent were already pending in the District of Delaware. Two of the defendants in the Delaware actions supported the motion…
Paying for Reduction to Practice of an Invention Does Not Make One a Co-Inventor of the Invention
Defendant was the sole named inventor of the patent in suit. Plaintiff brought a claim for inventorship, alleging that he was the co-inventor of the patent. The parties cross moved for summary judgment and for sanctions. The defendant and plaintiff maintained a business relationship for approximately 15 years, with plaintiff…
Multidistrict Panel Denies Transfer in Patent Infringement Action Involving Multiple Defendants and Patents in Different District Courts
Plaintiffs asserted patents relating to computer-based messaging products and services against numerous defendants, including Facebook, LinkedIn, E*Trade and Verizon in two different district courts. The patents at issue named Charles Bobo as an inventor and one of the earlier patents in the Bobo family of patents was asserted in six…
L.L. Bean Wins Motion to Sever and Transfer Where Plaintiff’s “Lame” Response That All Accused Products Were Similar Is Insufficient to Establish Proper Joinder
Pinpoint filed a patent infringement action in the Northern District of Illinois against L.L. Bean, Orbitz, Groupon and Hotwire for allegedly infringing three patents pertaining to accessing data using customer profiles. L.L. Bean filed a motion to sever and transfer to the District of Maine. The district court granted the…
Anonymous Letter Enough to Establish Jurisdiction for Declaratory Judgment Action
Plaintiff filed a declaratory judgment action of non-infringement after it received a letter from IP Navigation Group (“IP Nav”). The letter invited the plaintiff to engage in a licensing discussion regarding the patent or patent of IP Nav’s client, which remained anonymous. After filing the declaratory judgment, the plaintiff sought…