Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
272 results for '* topic:"Patent Litigation"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2024-03-18
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David E. Moore, Bindu A. Palapura, Andrew L. Brown, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jason R. Bartlett, Jason A. Crotty, Marc J. Pernick, Mauriel Kapouytian Woods LLP, San Francisco, CA; Steven Callahan, Christopher T. Bovenkamp, Charhon Callahan Robson & Garza, PLLC, Dallas, TX for plaintiff.
for defendant: Adam W. Poff, Robert M. Vrana, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; James R. Batchelder, James L. Davis, Jr., Daniel W. Richards, Ropes & Gray LLP, East Palo Alto, CA; Colin P. Dunn, Ropes & Gray LLP, New York, NY for defendant.
Case Number: 22-677-RGA
Court dismissed inequitable conduct/unclean hands defenses where there were no allegations as to how alleged fraudulent misrepresentations affected the validity of the patent-in-suit and the allegations of fraud failed to meet the particularity requirement.
Publication Date: 2024-01-22
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Biotechnology | Pharmaceuticals
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Susan E. Morrison, Casey M. Kraning, Fish & Richardson P.C., Wilmington, DE; Brian D. Coggio, Jeremy T. Saks, Fish & Richardson P.C., New York, NY; Kurt L. Glitzenstein, J. Peter Fasse, Fish & Richardson P.C., Boston, MA, John R. Lane, Fish & Richardson P.C., Houston, TX; Amy M. Dudash, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Wilmington, DE; Julie S. Goldemberg, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Philadelphia, PA; Janice H. Logan, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Derek J. Fahnestock, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; William B. Raich, Michael J. Flibbert, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC; Andrew M. Berdon, Robert B. Wilson, James E. Baker, Anastasia M. Fernands, Laura Fairneny, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, New York, NY; Molly Moore, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, Washington, DC; Charles E. Lipsey, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Reston, VA; Steven G. Madison, James Bieber, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendants.
Case Number: 20-1226-RGA
Merely combining natural gene sequences was insufficient to create a patentable invention.
Publication Date: 2024-01-08
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Consumer Products | Manufacturing
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bryson
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-984-WCB
Court granted defendant summary judgment on literal infringement where making a component of device removable to satisfy the patent claim scope would irreparably damage the device, which meant the device could not reasonably literally infringe upon the patent.
Publication Date: 2023-12-25
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Consumer Products | Manufacturing | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Burke
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kenneth L. Dorsney, Cortlan S. Hitch, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Robert L. Maier, Jennifer C. Tempesta, Michael E. Knierim, Nick Palmieri, Baker Botts L.L.P., New York, NY; Sarah J. Guske, Baker Botts L.L.P., San Francisco, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Karen Jacobs, Michael J. Flynn, Cameron P. Clark, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Anupam Sharma, Robert T. Haslam, Covington & Burling LLP, Palo Alto, CA; Richard L. Rainey, Han Park, Covington & Burling LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.
Case Number: 22-987-CJB
Receipt of notice of infringement only a day prior to the filing of the complaint was insufficient to charge defendant with pre-suit knowledge of the asserted patents.
Publication Date: 2023-12-25
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Pharmaceuticals
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Williams
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-cv-1387-GBW
Predecessor patents' disclaimer of scope did not restrict priority patent, which was broader in scope and whose language expressly contemplated the previously disavowed scope.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2023-12-11
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Agriculture | Manufacturing
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Neil A. Benchell, Timothy Devlin, Peter Akawie Mazur, Devlin Law Firm LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Jeremy A. Tigan, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Scott R. Brown, Matthew B. Walters, Todd A. Gangel, Hovey Williams LLP, Overland Park, KS for defendant.
Case Number: 22-1394-RGA
Court construed patent terms as having their plain and ordinary meaning where there was no language in the patent specifications supporting limitations on the claim scope.
Publication Date: 2023-12-11
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Legal Services | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-1247-CFC
Court referred plaintiffs' counsel for disciplinary investigations after finding that they acted at the direction of patent monetization firms rather than the named plaintiffs in the present patent infringement cases.
Publication Date: 2023-12-04
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, Redwood Shores, CA; Aaron M. Frankel, Cristina L. 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; John D. Vandenberg, Kristin L. Cleveland, Mark W. Wilson, 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, DC; 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, DC; Thomas W. Yeh, Latham & Watkins LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Brett M. Sanford, Daniel S. Todd, Latham & Watkins LLP, San Francisco, CA for defendants.
Case Number: 22-151-CJB
Court rejected assertion that patent claims were indefinite where intrinsic record provided enough explanation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to understand the scope of the claim and when a product would fall within that scope.
Publication Date: 2023-12-04
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Williams
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 15-611-GBW
Court granted leave to supplement damages expert report where, although supplementation would cause defendants to incur additional discovery expenses, there would be no delay of trial and the report was critical to plaintiff's ability to prove damages at trial.
Publication Date: 2023-11-27
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
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; Bart H. Williams, Proskauer Rose LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Nolan M. Goldberg, Baldassare Vinti, Proskauer Rose LLP, New York, NY; Edward Wang, Proskauer Rose LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Adrian C. Percer, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Redwood Shores, CA; Anish R. Desai, Tom Yu, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, New York, NY; Priyata Y. Patel, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.
Case Number: 22-1538-CJB
Court denied motion to dismiss patent infringement case on grounds of invalidity where patent potentially contained an inventive concept by claiming an ordered combination of conventional elements.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read