Filter This View

  • Cargill, Inc. v. Vantage Specialty Chem., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-20
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert M. Oakes, Fish & Richardson P.C., Wilmington, DE; Ahmed J. Davis, Joshua Rosefelt, Fish & Richardson P.C., Washington, DC; Elizabeth Flanagan, Brianna Chamberlin, Fish & Richardson P.C., Minneapolis, MN for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Rodger D. Smith II, Travis J. Murray, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Thomas R. Makin, David Cooperberg, Eric S. Lucas, Shearman & Sterling LLP, New York, NY; Lillian J. Mao, Sherman & Sterling LLP, Menlo Park, CA; Aaron L. Morris, Shearman & Sterling LLP, San Francisco, CA for defendant.
    Case Number: 22-979-RGA

    Use of the term "comprising" was open language permitting the inclusion of additional components not named in the claim language, with the claim language further implying that the term could include other components.

  • Diamond State Door, LLC v. Diamond State Pole Bldg., LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-06-06
    Practice Area: Trademarks
    Industry: Construction | Retail
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas H. Kramer, Anthony N. Delcollo, Offit Kurman, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: John C. Andrade, Elio Battista, Jr., Kyle F. Dunkle, Parkowski, Guerke & Swayze, P.A., Dover, DE for defendant.
    Case Number: 21 -1258-RGA

    Geographically descriptive mark was not protectable where lack of advertising, limited customer base, and lack of evidence of consumer confusion demonstrated that the mark had not acquired a secondary meaning.

  • 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.

  • MirTech, Inc. v. AgroFresh, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-05-16
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Agriculture | Consulting | Food and Beverage
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Glenn A. Brown, Real World Law, P.C., Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Chad S.C. Stover, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
    Case Number: 20-1170-RGA

    Court granted reargument and reconsidered summary judgment motion where it initially decided the motion based on outdated and incorrect information cited by the opposing party.

  • Mirtech, Inc. v. Agrofresh, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-04-04
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Agriculture | Food and Beverage
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Glenn A. Brown, Real World Law, P.C., Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs/counter-defendants.
    for defendant: Chad S.C. Stover, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant/counter-plaintiff.
    Case Number: 20-1170-RGA

    The court denied defendant's motion for summary judgment in a matter involving a breach of contract claim.

  • 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 "*"

  • MHL Custom, Inc. v. Waydoo USA, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-03-28
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Blake A. Bennett, Cooch and Taylor, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Dennis D. Murrell, Robert J. Theuerkauf, Brian P. McGraw, Megan E. Gibson, Middleton Reutlinger, Louisville, KY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kelly E. Farnan, Dorronda R. Bordley, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Edgar H. Haug, Robert E. Colletti, Mark Basanta, and Roman Khasidov, Haug Partners LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
    Case Number: D70178

    Court denied parties' cross-motions for summary judgment where there were genuine issues of material fact regarding whether defendants' products had dynamic or static stability as required by the specification of the patents in suit.

  • Barry v. Stryker Corp.

    Publication Date: 2023-03-28
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Biotechnology | Health Care
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Regina S.E. Murphy, Barnes & Thornburg, LLP, Wilmington, DE; D . Clay Holloway, Mitchell Stockwell, Courtney S. Dabbiere, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Atlanta, GA; Dario A. Machleidt, Christopher P. Damitio, Kathleen R.Geyer, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Seattle, WA; Taylor J. Pfingst, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Andrew W. Rinehart, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Winston-Salem, NC for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Jeremy Tigan, Brian P. Egan, Cameron P. Clark, Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnell, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jonathan G. Graves, Joseph E. Van Tassel, Cooley LLP, Reston, VA; Adam M. Pivovar, Cooley, LLP, Washington, DC; Alissa M. Wood, Cooley LLP, Palo Alto, CA; Chad T. Nitta, Jason S. Jackson, Heather N Tilley, Kutak Rock, LLP, Denver, CO for defendants.
    Case Number: D70177

    The court conducted a detailed analysis of claim construction terms in a patent litigation matter concerning spinal surgeries and deformities.

  • Exeltis USA Inc. v. Lupin Ltd.

    Publication Date: 2023-03-21
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Martina T. Hufnal, Douglas E. McCann, Gregory R. Booker, Fish & Richardson P.C., Wilmington, DE; Brian Coggio, Fish & Richardson P.C., New York, NY; Megan A. Chacon, Bernard Cryan, Fish & Richardson P.C., San Diego, CA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: John C. Phillips, Jr., David A. Bilson, Phillips Mclaughlin & Hall, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Michael Nutter, McGuireWoods LLP, Chicago, IL; Merritt Westcott, McGuireWoods LLP, Houston, TX; Corinne S. Hockman, McGuireWoods LLP, Raleigh, NC for defendants.
    Case Number: 22-434-RGA

    Patentees created their own definition for the term "about," but defined it in such a way as to make the term indefinite since it effectively created an unbounded value range for the claim.

  • Barry v. Stryker Corp.

    Publication Date: 2022-11-29
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Dominick T. Gattuso, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Clay Holloway, Mitchell G. Stockwell, Courtney S. Dabbiere, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Atlanta, GA; Dario A. Machleidt, Kathleen R. Geyer, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Seattle, WA; Taylor J. Pfingst, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Andrew W. Rinehart, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP, Winston-Salem, NC for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Brian P. Egan, Cameron P. Clark, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Chad T. Nitta, Jason S. Jackson, Heather N. Tilley, Kutak Rock, LLP, Denver, CO for defendants.
    Case Number: 20-1787-RGA

    The court denied defendants' request for leave to amend their complaint, finding that voluminous discovery was not an adequate basis for delay and defendants did not act with diligence in seeking leave to amend.

  • Allergan USA, Inc. v. Sun Pharm. Indus. Ltd.

    Publication Date: 2022-11-29
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Jeremy A. Tigan, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Lisa B. Pensabene, Hassen A. Sayeed, Daniel O'Boyle, Carolyn S. Wall, James Y. Li, Mark A. Hayden, O'Melveny & Myers LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Dominick T. Gattuso, Heyman Energio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Charles B. Klein, Jovial Wong, Winston & Strawn LLP, Washington, DC; Kevin J. Boyle, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL for defendant.
    Case Number: 19-1727-RGA

    The court granted plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings in part and denied in part.