By Memorandum Order entered by the Honorable Maryellen Noreika in Apex Clearing Corp. v. Axos Financial Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 19-2066-MN (D.Del. September 24, 2021), the Court
Continue Reading Judge Noreika Denies Plaintiffs and Defendants’ Respective Motions for Summary Judgment on Infringement/Non-Infringement in Trademark Infringement Action and Grants-in-Part Defendants’ Motion with Respect to Actual Damages
Federal Rule of Evidence 702
Judge Andrews Denies Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Plaintiff’s Expert Witness Testimony Relating to the Testing of the Accused Infringing Products
By Fox Rothschild LLP on
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…
Continue Reading Judge Andrews Denies Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Plaintiff’s Expert Witness Testimony Relating to the Testing of the Accused Infringing Products
District of Delaware Grants Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Plaintiff Damages Expert’s Testimony in False Advertising Action under the Lanham Act
By Fox Rothschild LLP 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…
Continue Reading District of Delaware Grants Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Plaintiff Damages Expert’s Testimony in False Advertising Action under the Lanham Act
Chief Judge Stark Denies Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s Motions to Exclude Each Others Damages Experts’ Opinions
By Fox Rothschild LLP on
By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Intel Corp. v. Future Link Systems, LLC, Civil Action No. 14-377-LPS (D.Del. June 1, 2017), the Court denied…
Continue Reading Chief Judge Stark Denies Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s Motions to Exclude Each Others Damages Experts’ Opinions
JUDGE STARK ISSUES HIS RECOMMENDATIONS ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS: CLAIM CONSTRUCTION CONTENTIONS
By Fox Rothschild LLP on
By Order dated October 30, 2009 (PDF), Magistrate Judge Leonard P. Stark issued his recommendations on Defendant Swisslog’s Motion to Dismiss Due to Lack of Entire Patent Ownership, the parties’ claim construction contentions with respect to the claims in dispute, several motions for summary judgment filed by the parties, and certain evidentiary motions.
Plaintiff, McKesson Automation, Inc. (“Plaintiff” or “McKesson”), and Defendant, Swisslog Holdings AG (“Defendant” or “Swisslog”), are in the business of manufacturing and selling automated pharmaceutical retrieval and distribution systems to hospitals. In this patent infringement action, McKesson asserts that Swisslog’s PillPick System infringes two of McKesson’s patents, U.S. Patent No. 5,468,110 (“the ‘110 patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 5,593,267 (“the ‘267 patent”). The ‘110 and ‘267 patents disclose a system for filling prescriptions and restocking medicines in a pharmacy.
Judge Stark Recommends that Swisslog’s Motion to Dismiss Be Denied…