By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in CFL Technologies LLC v. Osram Sylvania, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 18-1445-RGA (D.Del. July 8, 2019), the Court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims of willful infringement of U.S. Patent Numbers 5,510,680 (“the ‘680 patent”), 5,510,681 (“the ‘681 patent”), 6,172,464 (“the ‘464 patent”), and 5,757,140 (“the ‘140 patent”). In granting the motion, the Court explained that, in order to “state a claim of willful infringement, the patentee must allege facts in the pleading plausibly demonstrating that the accused infringer had committed subjective willful infringement as of the date of the filing of the willful infringement claim.” Id. at *16.
In their motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s willfulness claims, Defendants argued that they could not have acted egregiously when they had “(1) knowledge that the ’680, ‘681, and ‘464 patents had been repeatedly found unenforceable by multiple federal courts, including a case where OSRAM was [a] party, and (2) a good-faith belief that the ‘140 and ‘213 patents [were] also likely unenforceable for the same reasons.” Id. The Court agreed with Defendants finding that, “[g]iven the factual background, Plaintiff’s allegations that Defendants knew the patents-in-suit were enforceable are not plausible.” Id. Thus, the Court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s willfulness claims.
A copy of the Memorandum Opinion is attached.