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
Continue Reading Chief Judge Stark Passes the Baton to a New Chief Judge in the District of Delaware

By Memorandum Order entered in Neology, Inc. v. Federal Signal Corp., et al., Civil Action No. 11-672-LPS-MPT (D.Del., September 21, 2012), the Honorable Mary Pat Thynge denied plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an early motion for partial summary judgment after finding that there was no good cause to modify the scheduling order. Leave of Court was required because the scheduling order provides that “no case dispositive motion may be filed at a time before” November 4, 2013, “[u]nless the Court directs otherwise.” Id. at 2.

Plaintiff sought leave to file its early motion for partial summary judgment because the Court, in denying plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction, adopted plaintiff’s proposed construction as to certain terms in two patents. Id. Defendants responded asserting, among other things, that plaintiff’s motion was based on a false premise that the case was done with respect to claim construction and infringement issues as to the claims at issue. Id. at 3.

In denying plaintiff’s motion for leave, the Court noted that, although it did adopt plaintiff’s proposed claim construction as to certain terms for the purpose of preliminary injunction, “a conclusion of law such as claim construction is subject to change upon the development of the record after a district court’s decision on a motion for preliminary injunction.” Id. at 4. Thus, the initial construction for purposes of the preliminary injunction was only tentative and subject to being revisited upon development of the full record. Id. 

A complete copy of the Memorandum Opinion is attached.

 

Continue Reading Magistrate Judge Thynge Denies Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Early Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Infringement

By Memorandum Opinion entered in Galderma Laboratories Inc., et al. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC, et al., C.A. No. 11-1106-LPS (D.Del., September 7, 2012), the Honorable Leonard P. Stark granted

Continue Reading Judge Stark Grants Defendants’ Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings Based on Collateral Estoppel in ANDA Patent Infringement Action

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Sue L. Robinson in Helicos Biosciences Corporation v. Illumina, Inc., Civil Action No. 10-735-SLR (D.Del., May 3, 2012), the Court denied the

Continue Reading Judge Robinson Denies Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Patent Infringement Action to Northern District of California

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Sue L. Robinson in Boston Scientific Corporation, et al. v. Cordis Corporation, Civil Action No. 10-315-SLR (D.Del., March 13, 2012), the Court

Continue Reading Judge Robinson Denies Cordis’s Renewed Motion for Judgment As A Matter of Law as to Jury’s Award of Lost Profits in Patent Infringement Action

By Memorandum Opinion entered by the Honorable Richard G. Andrews in the consolidated cases of Robocast, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., Civil Action No. 11-235-RGA (D.Del., February 24, 2012) and

Continue Reading Judge Andrews Denies Apple and Microsoft’s Motion to Transfer Patent Infringement Case to Northern District of California

On December 8, 2011, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware adopted a "Default Standard for Discovery, Including Discovery of Electronically Stored Information (“ESI”)". Among other things, the

Continue Reading District of Delaware Adopts Revised Default Standard for Discovery, Including Electronically Stored Information