Patent Infringement: Successful Litigation Stays the "Course"
In Buergofol GmbH v. Omega Liner Company, Inc., 4-22-cv-04112 (DSD Jul. 13, 2023) (Karen E. Schreier), the court granted the defendant’s motion to compel and awarded monetary sanctions after the plaintiff failed to respond at...more
This post continues our summary of substantive orders in patent litigation in the District of Minnesota. This summary includes discovery relevant to willfulness findings, stays under the customer suit exception, and...more
What happens when your competitors infringe your patent for golf equipment – then declare bankruptcy to avoid paying up? In this episode, Harris Beach intellectual property (IP) attorneys share the story behind the $12...more
In a series of IPR proceedings between Petitioner Adobe Inc. and Patent Owner RAH Color Technologies LLC, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board declined to extend attorney work product protection to deposition questions seeking...more
In inter partes review (IPR) proceedings of patents relating to printer technology, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) granted Patent Owner’s motion to compel testimony over Petitioner’s arguments that the information...more
On Monday, Magistrate Judge Lloret, who is visiting the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, granted Boehringer Ingelheims’s (“BI’s”) motion to compel discovery relating...more
By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in TC Technology LLC v. Sprint Corp. et al., Civil Action 16-153-RGA (D.Del. December 13, 2018), the Court granted-in-part and denied-in-part defendants’ motion...more
The PTAB has discretion to permit “routine discovery” under 37 C.F.R. §42.51(b)(1)(iii) when that discovery “is narrowly directed to specific information known to the responding party to be inconsistent with a position...more
In a recent order, Administrative Law Judge Lord denied Respondents CSL Behring LLC, CSL Behring GMBH, and CSL Behring Recombinant Facility AG (“CSL Behring”) motion to compel discovery from Complainants Bioverativ Inc.,...more
This post is part of a monthly series summarizing notable activity in patent litigation in the District of Massachusetts, including short summaries of substantive orders issued in pending cases. Ethicon sued Covidien...more
In Allied v. OSMI, the Circuit affirms dismissal of a declaratory judgment action even though Allied’s Mexican distributors had been sued in Mexico on a corresponding Mexican patent. In a first Waymo v. Uber case, the panel...more
District Court Abused Discretion in Ignoring Federal Circuit Mandate to Reconsider Attorneys’ Fees Under Octane Fitness - In Adjustacam, LLC v. Newegg, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-1882, the Federal Circuit held that a district...more
In Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC v. Power Integrations, IPR2016-00809, Paper 65 (PTAB Aug. 4, 2017), the PTAB denied the patent owner’s request for authorization to serve requests for production seeking documents...more
Fallon, M. J. Plaintiff’s motion to compel documents is granted in part and denied in part. Its motion to correct and amend its motion to compel is denied as moot. Its motion to amend its complaint is denied as moot. Its...more
Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., et al. Case Number: 1:13-cv-03777-AKH - Judge Hellerstein resolved a number of discovery-related motions. First he found that defendants’ motion to strike...more
GEA Process Engineering, Inc. v. Steuben Foods, Inc. - In a decision that has the potential to expand the scope of permissible discovery in inter partes reviews (IPRs) as well as other post-grant procedures under the...more