By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Symantec Corp., Civil Action No. 10-1067-LPS (D.Del., March 10, 2016), the Court denied defendant’s motion for judgment as a matter of law (“JMOL”) on noninfringement, invalidity and damages with respect to U.S. Patent No. 5,987,610 (“the ‘610 patent”). 

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Graphics Properties Holdings Inc. v. Asus Computer International, Inc., Civil Action No. 12-210-LPS (D.Del., June 28, 2013), the Court denied Defendant Asus Computer International, Inc.’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and improper venue or, in the alternative, to transfer the action

By Memorandum Opinion entered in Depuy Synthes Products, LLC v.Globus Medical, Inc., C.A. No. 11-652-LPS (D.Del., May 7, 2013), The Honorable Leonard P. Stark construed thirty-six (36) disputed terms found in U.S. Patent Nos.7,846,207, 7,862,616, and 7,875,076 (collectively, the “patents-in-suit”).

A complete copy of the Memorandum Opinion is attached.
 

By Memorandum Opinion entered in Enova Technology Corporation v. Initio Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 10-04-LPS (D.Del., December 28, 2012), the Honorable Leonard P. Stark construed seven disputed terms found in U.S. Patent Nos. 7,136,995 and 7,900,057 (collectively, the “patents-in-suit”).

A complete copy of the Memorandum Opinion is attached.
 

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Check Point Software Technologies Ltd., et al., Civil Action No. 10-1067-LPS (D.Del., December 12, 2012), the Court issued its claim construction opinion construing twenty (20) disputed terms found in U.S. Patent Numbers 6,460,050 (“the ‘050 patent”), 6,073,142

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Exelis Inc. v. Cellco Partnership, et al., C.A. No. 09-190-LPS (D.Del., November 6, 2012), the Court issued its rulings on several motions for summary judgment and Daubert motions filed by plaintiff and defendants. Among other things, the Court denied defendants’ motion for summary

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in nCube Corporation (now Arris Group, Inc.) v. SeaChange International Inc., C.A. No. 01-011-LPS (D.Del., October 9, 2012), the Court denied the motion of Plaintiff Arris Group, Inc. (“Arris”) seeking to hold Defendant SeaChange International Inc. (“SeaChange”) in contempt of the permanent injunction order

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in British Telecommunications PLC v. Google Inc., C.A. No. 11-1249-LPS (D.Del., September 20, 2012), the Court granted Plaintiff British Telecommunications PLC’s motion for leave to file a First Supplemental Complaint to include claims of infringement against a new product and/or service introduced by defendant

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 defendants’ motion for partial judgment on the pleadings based on collateral estoppel after finding that the issue of whether a product containing 40 mg of

By Memorandum Opinion entered in Cadence Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. v. Paddock Laboratories, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 11-733-LPS (D.Del., August 22, 2012), the Honorable Leonard P. Stark construed twelve disputed terms found in U.S. Patent Nos. 6,028,022 and 6,992,218 (collectively, the “patents-in-suit”).

A complete copy of the Memorandum Opinion is attached.