Filter This View

  • Oasis Tooling, Inc. v. Siemens Indus. Software, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-20
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Electronics | Manufacturing | Software
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Philip A. Rovner, Jonathan A. Choa, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Paul J. Andre, Lisa Kobialka, James Hannah, Timothy Layden, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Menlo Park, CA; Aaron M. Frankel, Cristina Martinez, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Karen Jacobs, Cameron P. Clark, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kristin L. Cleveland, Mark W. Wilson, Salumeh R. Loesch, John D. Vandenberg, Klarquist Sparkman, LLP, Portland, OR; Kristina R. Cary, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Boston, MA; Gregg F. LoCascio, P.C., Michael A. Pearson, Jr., Matthew J. McIntee, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Washington, D.C.; Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Clement Naples, Latham & Watkins LLP, New York, NY; Gabriel K. Bell, Latham & Watkins LLP, Washington, D.C.; Thomas W. Yeh, Latham & Watkins LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Daniel S. Todd, Latham & Watkins LLP, San Francisco, CA for defendants.
    Case Number: 22-151-CJB

    Patent did not claim ineligible subject matter where it recited an inventive concept that improved upon the prior art by claiming to solve limitations of previous systems through a specific procedure.

  • Int'l Bus. Machines Corp. v. Rakuten, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-13
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: E-Commerce
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Williams
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David Ellis Moore, Bindu Ann George Palapura, Andrew L. Brown, Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP, Wilmington, DE; John M. Desmarais, Karim Z. Oussayef, Jonas R. McDavit, Jordon N. Malz, Brian D. Matty, Edward Geist, Jun Tong, Eliyahu Balsam, Amy I. Wann, William Vieth, William N. Yau, Benjamin Rodd, Michael Wueste, Lindsey E. Miller, Desmaris LLP, New York, NY; Michael Rhodes, Kyle Curry, Desmaris LLP, San Francisco, CA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Benjamin J. Schladweiler, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joshua L. Raskin, Allan A. Kassenoff, Julie P. Bookbinder, Jade Li-Yu Chen, Jonathan Presveli, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, New York, NY; Maja Sherman, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.
    Case Number: 21-461-GBW

    Court rejected claims of indefiniteness of patent terms where the specification and prosecution history demonstrated that the terms would be sufficient to inform a person of ordinary skill in the art of the scope of the invention or the means-plus-function limitation.

  • Jackson v. NuVasive, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-13
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen J. Kraftschik, Polsinelli PC, Wilmington, DE; Thomas Gemmell, Polsinelli PC, Chicago, IL; Darren E. Donnelly, Polsinelli LLP, San Francisco, CA; Aaron M. Levine, Polsinelli PC, Houston, TX for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Daniel M. Silver, Alexandra M. Joyce, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Colin G. Cabral, James R. Anderson, Proskauer Rose LLP, Boston, MA; Jessica M. Griffith, Proskauer Rose LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendant.
    Case Number: 21-53-RGA

    Court declined to adopt plaintiff's proposal to construe disputed patent term by its plain and ordinary meaning, where the definition advanced by plaintiff was merely functional in nature and there was no evidence that a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand the meaning of the disputed term.

  • Ecobee, Inc. v. EcoFactor, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-13
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Noreika
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thad. J. Bracegirdle, Andrea S. Brooks, Wilks, Lukoff & Bracegirdle LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Jeffrey L. Moyer, Travis S. Hunter, Arun J. Mohan, Richards Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendant.
    Case Number: 21-323 (MN)

    Disputed patent terms were not indefinite because a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand their plain and ordinary meaning and how the terms performed the function of the claimed invention.

  • Novartis Pharm. Corp. v. HEC Pharm Co., Ltd.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-06
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Williams
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Daniel M. Silver, Alexandra M. Joyce, Fish & Richardson P.C.; Jane M. Love, Ph.D., Robert Trenchard, Andrew P. Blythe, Christine L. Ranney, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Stamatios Stamoulis, Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC; Mieke K. Malmberg, Paul J. Skiermont, Sarah E. Spires, Steven J. Udick, Kevin P. Potere, Skiermont Derby LLP for defendant.
    Case Number: 20-133-GBW

    Court declined defendants' more limited proposed claim constructions that included negative limitations which had no basis in the intrinsic record.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    New Jersey Estate Litigation 2014

    Authors: Michael R. Griffinger, Paul F. Cullum III

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Galderma Labs. L.P. v. Lupin Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-06
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Bibas
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Jeremy A. Tigan, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew J. Cochran, Gerald J. Flattman, Jr., Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Megan C. Haney, John C. Phillips, Jr., Phillips, McLaughlin & Hall, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Adrianne C. Rose, Joseph T. Jaros, Natasha L. White, William A. Rakoczy, Rakoczy Molino Mazzochi Siwik LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.
    Case Number: 21-cv-1710-SB

    Court could clarify claim constructions from prior litigation involving the same patents-in-suit even if patentee acted as its own lexicographer, but only narrow clarification was necessary for one of the disputed terms.

  • Lamplight Licensing LLC v. ABB Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-06
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Legal Services
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jimmy C. Chong, Chong Law Firm, PA, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Benjamin J. Schladweiler, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew R. Sommer, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, McLean, VA for defendant.
    Case Number: 22-418-CFC

    Court possessed inherent authority to investigate plaintiff's possible efforts to defraud the court even after plaintiff voluntarily moved to dismiss its lawsuit.

  • Election Sys. & Software, LLC v. Smartmatic USA Corp.

    Publication Date: 2023-05-23
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Patricia S. Rogowski, Rogowski Law, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Robert M. Evans, Jr., Michael J. Hartley, Michael H. Durbin, T. Hunter Brown, Lewis Rice, LLP, St. Louis, MO for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Brian A. Biggs, Angela C. Whitesell, Erin E. Larson, DLA Piper, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Larissa S. Bifano, DLA Piper, LLP, Boston, MA; Richard Mulloy, DLA PIper, LLP, San Diego, CA; Zachary Loney, DLA PIper, LLP, Austin, TX for defendant.
    Case Number: 18-cv-1259-RGA

    Patent infringement claims were dismissed where asserted claims consisted solely of abstract ideas integral to the voting process and contained no new inventive concept.

  • Mellaconic IP LLC v. Timeclock Plus, LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-05-23
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Software
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Andrew S. Curfman, Howard Wemow, Sand, Sebolt & Wernow Co., LPA, Canton, OH for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Jimmy C. Chong, Chong Law Firm, PA, Wilmington, DE
    Case Number: 22-244-CFC

    Court possessed inherent authority to demand production of documents that might evidence potential fraud committed upon the court even though plaintiff had moved to voluntarily dismiss the case.

  • Backertop Licensing LLP v. Canary Connect, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-05-16
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Consumer Products | Electronics
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jimmy C. Chong, Chong Law Firm, PA, Wilmington, DE; Ronald W. Bums, Fresh IP PLC, Frisco, TX for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Alan Richard Silverstein, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark K. Suri, Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, Chicago, IL; Jeremy Douglas Anderson, Fish & Richardson, P.C., Wilmington, DE; Ricardo J. Bonilla, Fish & Richardson, P.C., Dallas, TX for defendants.
    Case Number: 22-572-CFC

    Court had jurisdiction to issue memorandum despite plaintiff's motion to voluntarily dismiss, where the purpose of the memorandum was to obtain information for the court concerning whether plaintiff had been fraudulently established to shield real parties-in-interest from liability for bringing potentially frivolous litigation.