• AOS Holding Co. v. Bradford White Corp.

    Publication Date: 2019-07-03
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Hardware
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: John C. Phillips, Jr. and David A. Bilson, Phillips, Goldman, McLaughlin & Hall, P.A., Wilmington, DE; S. Edward Sarskas, Michael Best & Friedrich LLP, Milwaukee, WI; Kenneth M. Albridge III, Michael Best & Friedrich LLP, Madison, WI for plaintiffs
    for defendant: Andrew J. Koopman and Christopher H. Blaszkowski, RatnerPrestia, Wilmington, DE; Benjamin E. Leace, RatnerPrestia, King of Prussia, PA for defendant.

    Case Number: D68615

    Patent claim was not struck for indefiniteness when a person of ordinary skill in the art would sufficiently understand how to measure the term in the context of the claimed invention.

  • Sun Life Assurance Co. Canada v. U.S. Bank, N.A.

    Publication Date: 2019-05-29
    Practice Area: Consumer Protection | Insurance Law
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Insurance
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas J. Francella, Gregory F. Fischer, Michael J. Miller, Charles J. Vinicombe, Barry Golob, Daniel P. Thiel, Lezlie Madden and Kristin Parker, Cozen O'Connor, Wilmington, DE and Philadelphia, PA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: David J. Baldwin, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; John E. Failla, Nathan Lander and Elise A. Yablonski, Proskauer Rose LLP, New York, NY for defendant.

    Case Number: D68578

    Genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment on defendant's counterclaims for deceptive trade practices and promissory estoppel in this insurance matter.

  • Sun Life Assurance Co. Canada v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n

    Publication Date: 2019-03-27
    Practice Area: Insurance Litigation | Trusts and Estates
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Insurance
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas J. Francella, Michael J. Miller, Gregory J. Star, Charles J. Vinicombe and Daniel P. Thiel, Cozen O'Connor, Wilmington, DE and Philadelphia, PA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: David J. Baldwin and Ryan C. Cicoski, Potter Anderdon & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE ; John E. Fail-la, Nathan Lander and Elise A. Yablonski ,Proskauer Rose LLP, New York, NY for defendant.

    Case Number: D68507

    A life insurance policy was void because no insurable interest existed. Summary judgment granted in favor of the insurer.

  • Wi-Lan Inc. v. Sharp Elec. Corp.

    Publication Date: 2019-03-06
    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, Wilmington, DE; Monte M. Bond, Jeffrey R. Bragalone, Patrick J. Conroy, Terry Saad and James R. Perkins, Bragalone Conroy P.C., Dallas, TX for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld and Stephen J. Kraftschik, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gianni Cutri, Joel Merkin, Michael W. De Vries, Adam R. Alper, James Beard and Jared Bárcenas, Kirk-land & Ellis LLP, Chicago, IL, Los Angeles, CA, San Francisco, CA, New York, NY for defendant Sharp Elec. Corp. Pilar Gabrielle Kraman, Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Rex Hwang, Stanley M. Gibson and Jessica Newman, Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendant Vizio, Inc.

    Case Number: D68455

    The court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants in this patent infringement matter, because plain-tiff was unable to provide admissible evidence of direct infringement.

  • Citrix Sys., Inc. v. AVI Networks, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-02-27
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Douglas E. McCann and Robert M. Oaks, Fish & Richardson P.C., Wilmington, DE; Ruffin B. Cordell and Indranil Mukerji, Fish & Richardson P.C., Washington, DC; Adam J. Kessel, Fish & Richardson P.C., Boston, MA; Elizabeth Brenckman , Fish & Richardson P.C., New York. NY; John-Paul Fryckman, Fish & Richardson P.C., San Diego, CA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: David E. Moore, Bindu A. Palapura, and Stephanie E. O'Byrne, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Josh Krevitt and Brian A. Rosenthal, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, New York, NY; Y. Ernest Hsin, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, San Francisco, CA; Brian K. Andrea, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.

    Case Number: D68470

    Patent claims were directed to patent-ineligible subject matter where they merely attempted to claim the use of dynamic response times, as opposed to static response times, to improve the determination of availability of network service, without demonstrating how such processes were unique to or improved the functionality of computer networks.

  • 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.

  • Camarillo Holdings LLC v. Amstel River Holdings, LLC

    Publication Date: 2018-11-07
    Practice Area: Damages | Fee Disputes
    Industry: Legal Services
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kathleen M. Miller, Robert K. Beste, III, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE, attorneys for plaintiff
    for defendant: Paul D. Brown, Joseph B. Cicero, Chipman Brown Cicero & Cole, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark A. Castillo, Curtis Castillo PC, Dallas, TX, attorneys for defendants.

    Case Number: D68344

    Remand granted where face of plaintiffs' complaint failed to give rise to any federal cause of action and where defendants' potential defenses under federal law were ineligible to create federal question jurisdiction.

  • Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-11-07
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joseph J. Farnan, Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Amy K. Wigmore, Gregory H. Lantiere, Heather M. Petruzzi, Tracey C. Allen, Jeffrey T. Hanston, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dale LLP, Washington, DC; Kevin S. Prussia, Andrew J. Danford, Timothy A. Cook, Kevin M. Yukerwich, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dale LLP, Boston, MA, attorneys for plaintiffs
    for defendant: Arthur G. Connolly, III, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Wilmington, DE; Neal C. Belgam, Eve H. Ormerod, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Stamatios Stamaulis, Richard C. Weinblatt, Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC, Wilmington, DE; Karen L. Pascale, Robert M. Vrana, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor LLP, Wilmington, DE; John C. Phillips, Jr., David A. Bilson, Phillips, Goldman, McLaughlin & Hall, P.A., Wilmington, DE; David Ellis Moore, Bindu Palapura, Stephanie E. O'Byrne, Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sean M. Brennecke, Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg LLP, Wilmington, DE; Dominick T. Gattuso, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE, attorneys for defendants.

    Case Number: D68342

    Court rejected more restrictive construction of patent claims where intrinsic evidence indicated that patentee did not intend to apply different definitions when using term in different applications or to restrict measurement techniques to meet patent specification for active particles.

  • Praxis Energy Agents Pte Ltd v. M/V Pebble Beach

    Publication Date: 2018-10-17
    Practice Area: Admiralty | International Law
    Industry: Cargo and Shipping
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Timothy Jay Houseal, J. Stephen Simms and Marios J. Monopolis for plaintiff
    for defendant: Michael B. McCauley, Frank P. DeGuilio and Kevin G. O'Donovan for defendant.

    Case Number: D68324

    Plaintiff did not have a valid maritime lien and was not entitled to detain a vessel in Delaware.

  • TMI Solutions LLC v. Bath & Body Works Direct, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2018-10-10
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: E-Commerce | Retail
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Timothy Devlin, Timothy E. Grochocinski and Joseph P. Oldaker for plaintiff
    for defendant: Frederick L. Cottrell, III, Katharine L. Mowery, Douglas F. Stewart and David J. Ball for defendant Nordstrom, Inc.; Denise S. Kraft, Brian A. Briggs, Nicholas G. Papastavros and Yasmin Ghassab for defendant Staples, Inc.; Beth Moskow-Schnoll, Evan W. Krick, Lynn E. Rzonca, Richard W. Miller and Chittam U. Thakore for remaining defendants.

    Case Number: D68316

    Plaintiff's complaint alleged sufficient facts to demonstrate an inventive concept, and the complaint stated a claim for direct infringement in accordance with the procedural rules.