• Baggage Airline Guest Serv., Inc. v. Roadie, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-01-23
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Cargo and Shipping | Transportation
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Neal Belgam and Eve Ormerod, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Stefan V. Stein, Mayanne Downs, Jason Zimmerman and Cole Carlson, Gray Robinson P.A., Orlando, FL for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Pilar G. Kraman, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Edward A. Pennington, John P. Moy, John P. Pen-nington and Darlene K. Tzou, Smith, Gambrell & Russell LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.

    Case Number: D68434

    Patent claims for a baggage delivery system involved an abstract idea and did not contain any inventive concept.

  • Alarm.com, Inc. v. Securenet Tech. LLC

    Publication Date: 2019-01-23
    Practice Area: Expert Witnesses | Patent Litigation
    Industry: E-Commerce
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Mary B. Matterer and Kenneth L. Dorsney, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Ian R. Liston, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Wilmington, DE; James C. Yoon, Ryan R. Smith, Christopher D. Mays and Mary A. Procaccio-Flowers, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Palo Alto, CA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld and Stephen J. Kraftschik, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Erik B. Milch and Frank Pietrantonio, Cooley LLP, Reston, VA; Rose Whelan and Naina Soni, Cooley LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.

    Case Number: D68433

    Portions of defendant's motion to exclude an expert's lost profit opinion went to the weight and not the admissibility of the evidence, but the court excluded other parts of the expert's testimony.

  • AgroFresh Inc. v. Mirtech, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-01-16
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Agriculture | Chemicals and Materials | Consumer Products
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Noreika
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Chad S.C. Stover and Regina S.E. Murphy, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Wilmington, DE; Robert D. Mac-Gill, Lynn C. Tyler, Deborah Pollack-Milgate, Joseph T. Wendt and Jessica M. Lindemann, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Indianapolis, IN for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Frederick L. Cottrell, III, Jeffrey L. Moyer and Nicole K. Pedi of Richards, Layton & Finger, Wilmington, DE; Gerald F. Ivey, John M. Williamson, Anand K. Sharma, Rajeev Gupta, Aidan C. Skoyles, Karthik Kumar and Daniel F. Roland, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.

    Case Number: D68424

    In this patent claim construction matter, the court provided clarification to give meaning to all the claim terms.

  • Takeda Pharm., U.S.A. v. West-Ward Pharm Corp.

    Publication Date: 2019-01-09
    Practice Area: Damages | Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Mary W. Bourke and Daniel M. Attaway, Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeffrey I. Weinberger, Ted G. Dane, Heather E. Takahashi, Elizabeth L. Laughton, Hannah L. Dubina, Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, Los Angeles, CA Celia R. Choy and Peter A. Detre, Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Dominick T. Gattuso, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Lauren C. Tortorella, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL, Charles B. Klein and Ilan Wurman, Winston & Strawn LLP, Washington, DC; Elaine H. Blais, Robert D. Carroll, Lana S. Shiferman, Robyn R. Schwartz and Louis L. Lobel, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA for defendants.

    Case Number: D68421

    Defendants were entitled to damages for lost profits under a bond where the court improperly granted a preliminary re-straining order.

  • Horatio Washington Depot Techs. LLC v. TOLMAR, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-01-02
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kelly E. Farnan, Richards, Layton & Finger, Wilmington, DE; A. Neal Seth, Lawrence M. Sung, Theresa Summers, and Alexander B. Oxczarczak, Wiley Rein LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Adam W. Poff, Young, Conway, Stargatt & Taylor, Wilmington, DE; Jeffrey R. Gargano, Kevin P. Shortsle, and Zachary D. Miller, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.

    Case Number: D68416

    The court accepted proposed claim construction based upon the specification's repeated references to the term.

  • Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-01-02
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: E-Commerce | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Noreika
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David E. Moore, Bindu A. Palapura and Stephanie E. O'Byrne of Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jonathan K. Waldrop, Darcy L. Jones, Marcus A. Barber, John W. Downing, Heather S. Kim and Jack Shaw of Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP , Redwood Shores, CA; Hershy Stern and Rodney R. Miller of Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Steven J. Balick and Andrew C. Mayo of Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; Thomas L. Duston and Tron Y. Fun of Marshall, Gerstein and Borun, LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.

    Case Number: D68409

    Plaintiff's patent claims involved abstract ideas, but the court denied defendant's motion to dismiss because unresolved factual issues existed regarding the nature of the claims.

  • Rosebud LMS, Inc. v. Salesforce.com, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-12-05
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: E-Commerce | Software
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Richard C. Weinblatt of Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC, Wilmington, DE and Cecil E. Key of Dimurogins-berg, P.C., Alexandria, VA for plaintiff
    for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld and Stephen J. Kraftschik of Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: D68381

    Defendant failed to establish sufficient factors that weighed strongly in favor of transfer of this patent action to a federal court in California, so the court denied its motion.

  • Olympus Corp. v. Maxell, Ltd.

    Publication Date: 2018-11-28
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Consumer Products | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Noreika
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: John W. Shaw, Karen E. Keller, and Nathan R. Hoeschen, Shaw Keller LLP, Wilmington, DE; William J. McCabe, Matthew J. Moffa, and Thomas V. Matthew, Perkins Coie LLP, New York, NY; Kyle R. Canavera, Perkins Coie LLP, San Diego, CA for plaintiffs
    for defendant: Timothy Devlin and James Gorman, Devlin Law Firm LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jamie B. Beaber, Kfir B. Levy, James A. Fussell, III, Tiffany A. Miller, Baldine B. Paul, and Alison T. Gelsleichter, Mayer Brown LLP, Washington, DC; Robert G. Pluta, Mayer Brown LLP, Chicago, IL for defendant.

    Case Number: D68369

    Patent-in-suit was not directed to patent-ineligible subject matter where it addressed technological improvements to enable camera with recording/play-back capabilities that consumed less power, rather than being directed to the general abstract idea of battery or resource conservation.

  • VLSI Tech. LLC v. Intel Corp.

    Publication Date: 2018-11-21
    Practice Area: Intellectual Property | Patent Litigation
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan and Michael J. Farman of Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Morgan Chu, Ben Hattenbach, Amy E. Proctor, Dominik Slusarczyk and Charlotte J. Wen of Irell & Manella LLP, Boston, MA, attorneys for plaintiff
    for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld and Jeremy A. Tigan of Morris, Nichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE Wil-liam F. Lee and Louis W. Tompros of Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale and Dorr LLP, Palo Alto, CA, Mark D. Selwyn and Amanda L Major of Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale and Dorr LLP, Washington, DC, at-torneys for defendant.

    Case Number: D68365

    Plaintiff's forum choice was entitled to paramount consideration, and little overlap existed between this case and another pending patent matter between the same parties in another jurisdiction.

  • The Recorder

    Bio-Rad Snares $24 Million Patent Infringement Verdict

    November 15, 2018

    A Delaware jury found that 10x Genomics infringed all seven asserted claims related to droplet microfluidic technology.