By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in TQ Delta, LLC v. 2Wire, Inc., Civil Action No. 13-1835-RGA (D.Del. July 14, 2021), the Court denied Defendant’s motion to exclude the testimony of Plaintiff’s expert witness relating to the testing of the accused infringing products with regard to the Family 4 Patents.
District of Delaware
Happy 4th of July!
By Gregory B. Williams on
Wishing all readers of the Delaware Intellectual Property Litigation blog a Happy 4th of July!
Chief Judge Stark Passes the Baton to a New Chief Judge in the District of Delaware
By Gregory B. Williams on
Effective July 1, 2021, the Honorable Colm F. Connolly became Chief Judge in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Chief Judge Connolly assumed the role from the Honorable Leonard P. Stark, who served the District of Delaware well as Chief Judge since 2014.
Thank you Chief Judge Stark for your leadership,…
District of Delaware Denies Defendant’s Motion for Further Construction of Previously Construed Claim Term in Dispute But Leaves Door Open that It May Further Construe the Same Term Again Before or During Infringement Trial
By Gregory B. Williams on
By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Maryellen Noreika in Sentient Sensors, LLC v. Cypress Semiconductor Corp., Civil Action No. 19-1868-MN (D.Del. June 24, 2021), the Court denied Defendant Cypress Semiconductor Corporation’s motion seeking further construction of the claim term “embedded” which appears in numerous claims of the patent-in-suit, U.S. Patent No. 6,938,177 (“the…
HAPPY FATHER’S DAY!
By Gregory B. Williams on
Wishing all the Dads a Happy Father’s Day!
District of Delaware Denies Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings in Patent Infringement Action
By Gregory B. Williams on
By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Maryellen Noreika in SIPCO, LLC v. Aruba Networks, LLC et al., Civil Action No. 20-537-MN (D.Del. June 9, 2021), the Court denied Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings on Counts III and IV of Plaintiff’s Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil…
District of Delaware Concludes that ICON’s Alleged Claims Against Peleton for Statements Concerning “Innovation” Fail to State a Claim under the Lanham Act
By Gregory B. Williams on
By Memorandum Opinion entered by the Honorable Richard G. Andrews in Peleton Interactive, Inc. v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., Civil Action No. 20-662-RGA (D.Del. May 28, 2021), the Court granted in part and denied in part Peleton’s Partial Motion to Dismiss ICON’s First Amended Counterclaims. In doing so, among other things, the Court…
District of Delaware Grants Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Plaintiff Damages Expert’s Testimony in False Advertising Action under the Lanham Act
By Gregory B. Williams on
By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Colm F. Connolly in CareDx, Inc. v. Natera, Inc., Civil Action No. 19-662-CFC-CJB (D.Del. May 7, 2021), the Court granted Natera’s motion to exclude at trial the opinions of CareDx’s damages expert relating to “corrective advertising damages.” CareDx sought to offer the damages expert’s testimony at trial…
Judge Connolly Enters Standing Order Setting Forth New Summary Judgment Motion Practice in All Patent Cases Assigned to Him
By Gregory B. Williams on
By Standing Order entered on April 30, 2021, the Honorable Colm F. Connolly, of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, rolled out the new summary judgment motion practice in all patent cases assigned to him. Essentially, Judge Connolly is now requiring parties to number the motions for summary judgment that they…
Judge Connolly Grants Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment of Indefiniteness in Patent Infringement Action
By Gregory B. Williams on
By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Colm F. Connolly in University of Massachusetts et al. v. L’Oréal USA, Inc., Civil Action No. 17-0868-CFC-SRF (D.Del. April 20, 2021), the Court granted Defendant L’Oréal’s motion for summary judgment of indefiniteness of the skin enhancement claim limitation of U.S. Patent Numbers 6,423,327 (“the ‘327 patent”) and…