Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
193 results for '* topic:"Patent Litigation"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2020-01-01
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Aerospace | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Stark
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jody C. Barillare, Amy M. Dudash, Willard K. Tom, Jon R. Roellke, Ryan Kantor and Bradford A. Cangro, Morgan, Lewis & Boekius LLP, Wilmington, DE and Washington, DC; Kelly E. Farnan and Christine D. Haynes, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; David M. Farnum and Sherry X. Wu, Anova Law Group, PLLC, Sterling, VA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Anne Shea Gaza, Robert M. Vrana and Samantha G. Wilson, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Tim-othy C. Bickham, John Caracappa, Jonathan B. Sallet, Scott M. Richey, Beau M. Goodrick, Andrew Xue and Michael Flynn-O’Brien, Steptoe & Johnson LLP, Washington, DC and San Francisco, CA for defendants.
Case Number: D68828
In its claim construction ruling, the court rejected defendants' arguments regarding indefiniteness in this patent matter.
Publication Date: 2020-01-01
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Consumer Products | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian Farnan and Michael Farnan , Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeffrey Bragalone, Jonathan Rastegar and T. William Ken-nedy, Bragalone Conroy P.C., Dallas, TX for plaintiff.
for defendant: Jack Blumenfeld and Jennifer Ying, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Cory Davis, Theresa Weisenberger, Daniel Goettle and Jennifer Kurcz, Baker & Hostetler LLP, Atlanta, GA, Philadelphia, PA and Chicago, IL for defendant.
Case Number: D68827
Plaintiff failed to provide fair notice of how defendant's accused products directly infringed on plaintiff's patents, and because the court concluded plaintiff did not adequately allege direct infringement, it could not recover for induced infringement either.
Publication Date: 2020-01-01
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Electronics | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen B. Brauerman and Sara E. Bussiere, Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Mark S. Raskin, Robert A. Whitman, Michael S. De Vincenzo, John F. Petrsoric, and Andrea Pacelli, Mishcon De Reya New York LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld and Jennifer Ying, Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael Brody and Jonathan Retsky, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL; David P. Enzminger, Winston & Strawn LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Krishnan Padmanabhan, Winston & Strawn LLP, New York, NY; James Lin, Winston & Strawn LLP, Menlo Park, CA for defendant.
Case Number: D68823
Expert opinion regarding written description and enablement excluded where the expert focused on the accused technologies and failed to analyze whether the specifications sufficiently described the patent claims.
Publication Date: 2019-12-25
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 and Stephanie E. O’Byrne, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wil-mington, DE; Steven Yovits, Mark Scott, Clifford Katz and Malavika Rao, Kelley Drye & Warren LLP, Chicago, IL for plaintiff.
for defendant: Kelly E. Farnan, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Sten Jensen, Clement Seth Roberts and Alyssa Caridis, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Washington, DC, San Francisco, CA and Los Angeles, CA for defendant.
Case Number: D68817
Plaintiff's patents contained inventive concepts that were directed to address known issues, so they were not simply abstract ideas.
Publication Date: 2019-12-25
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Pharmaceuticals
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Derek J. Fahnestock, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Errol B. Taylor, Fredrick, M. Zullow, Anna Brook, Jordan P. Markham, Kyanna Lewis, Nathaniel T. Browand and Venus Allahyarzadeh, Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: John C. Phillips, Jr. and David A. Bilson, Phillips, Goldman, McCaughlin & Hall, P.A., Wilmington, DE; George C. Lombardi, Michael K. Nutter, Ivan M. Poullaos, John R. McNair and Nimalka R. Wickramasek-era, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL and Los Angeles, CA for defendant.
Case Number: D68820
The court properly excluded evidence relating to prior litigation which involved a different pharmaceutical.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2019-12-25
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Stark
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan and Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wimington, DE; Amir Alavi,, Demetrios Anaipakos, Alisa A. Lipski, Timothy Shelby, Scott W. Clark, Monica Uddin, Nathan Campbell, and Louis Liao, Ahmad, Zavitsanos, Anaipakos, Alavi & Mensing, P.C., Houston, TX for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Frederick L. Cottrell and Jason J. Rawnsley, Richards, Layton & Finger, PA, Wilmington, DE; Gregory P. Stone, Eric P. Tuttle, Zachary M. Briers, Hannah Dubina, Ashley D. Kaplan and Peter A. Detre, Munger, Tolles & Olson, LLP, Los Angeles, CA and San Francisco, CA for defendants.
Case Number: D68816
Court ruled that a preamble term was limiting because it was essential to understand the remaining terms in the claim, and accepted defendant's proposed construction where the intrinsic evidence required construing the term as requiring a mathematical relationship.
Publication Date: 2019-12-11
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stamatios Stamoulis and Richard C. Weinblatt, Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs. Wendy Verland and Jeffrey D. Ahdoot, Blackbird Technologies, Boston, MA for plaintiff Blackbird Tech LLC. Thomas C. Grimm and Jeremy A. Tigan, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE
for defendant: Ronald F. Lopez and Jennifer Hayes, Nixon Peabody LLP, San Francisco, CA and Los Angeles, CA for Sierra Wireless defend-ants. Jack B. Blumenfeld and Rodger D. Smith II, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; David Loewenstein and Clyde A. Shuman, Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer, Wilmington, DE for defendant Telit Wireless Solutions.
Case Number: D68804
In this patent claim construction matter, the court concluded that a preamble could be limiting, and a prior statement was not sufficiently specific to qualify as a prosecution history disclaimer.
Publication Date: 2019-12-11
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Software | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Stark
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kenneth L. Dorsney, Morris James, Wilmington, DE; Courtland L. Reichman, Shawna Ballard, Jennifer P. Estremera, Michael G. Flanigan, Joachim B. Steinberg, Kate Falkenstien, Ariel C. Green, Sarah O. Jorgensen, Christine E. Lehman, Khue V. Ho-ant, Jaime Cardenas-Navia and Wesley L. White, Reichman Jorgensen LLP, Redwood Shores, CA, Atlanta GA, Washington, DC and New York, NY; Gary J. Toman, Weinberg Wheeler Hudgins Gunn & Dial, Atlanta, GA; Peter J. Ayers, Law Office of Peter J. Ayers, PLLC , Austin, TX for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Anne Shea Gaza, Robert M. Vrana and Samantha G. Wilson of Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Ar-turo J. González, Michael A. Jacobs, Richard S.J. Hung, Bita Rahebi and Scott F. Llewellyn, Morrison & Foerster LLP, San Francisco, CA, Los Angeles, CA and Denver, CO for defendant.
Case Number: D68802
The court construed disputed patent terms based on intrinsic evidence.
Publication Date: 2019-12-04
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Automotive | Manufacturing
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Stark
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jeremy A. Tigan, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Ronald C. Finley, Justin T. Beck, and Remington A. Lenton-Young, Beck, Bismonte & Finley LLP, San Jose, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Brian E. Farnan and Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Clement J. Naples and Michelle L. Ernst, Latham & Watkins LLP, New York, NY; Ron E. Shulman, Latham & Watkins LLP, Menlo Park, CA for defendant.
Case Number: D68791
Court construed patent terms to be consistent with the depictions of the invention in the figures in the patent.
Publication Date: 2019-11-06
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Pharmaceuticals
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael P. Kelly, Daniel M. Silver, and Alexandra M. Joyce, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gary M. Rubman, Douglas A. Behrens, and Anna Q. Han, Covington & Burlington LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Frederick L. Cottrell, III, Jason J. Rawnsley, and Alexandra M. Ewing, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Shannon M. Bloodworth, Perkins Coie LLP, Washington, DC; David L. Anstaett and Emily J. Greb, Perkins Coie LLP, Madison, WI for defendants.
Case Number: D68758
Court transferred venue where one party was not a domicilary of the jurisdiction and there was no basis to impute venue from the resident co-defendant under a theory of successor-in-interest or agency, and factors weighed in favor of transfer of the entire litigation.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read