10. Ensign-Bickford, 817 F.Supp. at 1025-27. The sale issue in the Ensign-Bickford case was decided for purposes of subject matter jurisdiction.
11. Wing Shing Products, 479 F.Supp. 388, 401-05.
12. Transocean, 617 F.3d at 1308.
13. Biometrics v. New Womyn, 112 F.Supp.2d 869, 873 (E.D. Mo. 2000).
14. ISCO International v. Conductus, 2003 WL 280276, at * 2 (D. Del. Feb. 10, 2003).
15. OptiGen, 777 F. Supp. 2d at 403. See also Baden Sports v. Kabushiki Kaisha Molten, 2008 WL 356558, at * 1 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 29, 2008) ("Although Molten could not be held liable for offers to sell infringing balls abroad, if Molten offers to sell infringing basketballs to U.S. consumers, even if the offer is made through a foreign website, Molten has offered to sell an infringing product in violation of Section 271(a)"). In Baden, the court ultimately ruled against the plaintiff because it could not establish that the defendants' website contained pricing information or that consumers could purchase basketballs through the website.
16. Transocean, 617 F.3d at 1308-09.
17. SEB, S.A. v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 412 F.Supp.2d 336, 342 n.6 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (Robsinson, J.).
18. Wing Shing Products, 479 F.Supp. at 407 (Holwell, J.).
19. In re Bill of Lading Transmission & Processing Sys. Patent Litig., 681 F.3d 1323, 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
Subscribe to New York Law Journal
