By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Softview LLC v. Apple, Inc. and AT&T Mobility LLC, Civil Action No. 10-389-LPS (D.Del., September 30, 2011), the

Continue Reading Judge Stark Grants Softview’s Motion to Strike Defendants Apple and AT&T Mobility’s Inequitable Conduct Defenses

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., et al. v. Xoft, Inc., Civil Action No. 10-308-LPS-MPT, the Court affirmed the Report

Continue Reading Court Affirms Magistrate Judge Thynge’s Report and Recommendation Denying Xoft’s Motion to Transfer

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Magnetar Technologies Corp, et al. v. Six Flags Theme Parks Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 07-127-LPS (D.Del.

Continue Reading Judge Stark Denies Defendants’ Motion to Amend to Add Antitrust Counterclaim

By Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Power Integrations, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 04-1371-LPS (D.Del., January 18, 2011), the Court granted in part and denied in part the post-trial motion of the prevailing Plaintiff, Power Integrations, Inc. (“Power”), to declare the case exceptional and to award Power treble damages and its attorneys’ fees. Specifically, the Court granted Power’s motion for enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 to the extent that it enhanced Power’s damages two times (i.e. 200%) as opposed to trebling damages. Id. at 22. The Court denied Power’s motion to declare the case exceptional and to award attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Id. at 24.

Complete copies of the Court’s Opinion and Order are attached.
 

Continue Reading Judge Stark Grants Prevailing Plaintiff’s Request For Enhanced Damages In Part And Denies Request For Award Of Attorneys’ Fees

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Cooper Notification, Inc. v. Twitter, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 09-865-LPS (D.Del., December 13, 2010), the Court denied

Continue Reading Judge Stark Denies Defendants’ Motion to Stay Patent Infringement Action Pending Resolution of Reexamination Proceeding Before USPTO