Intellectual Property

IP Litigation

Delaware Intellectual Property Litigation Blog

https://delawareintellectualproperty.foxrothschild.com/

Wilmington attorney Gregory B. Williams explores the decisions issued by the U.S. District Court of Delaware in the areas of antitrust and intellectual property law.

Recent Blog Posts

  • Judge Sleet Finds that Actavis’ Proposed ANDA Products Infringe Recro’s Asserted Patents By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Gregory M. Sleet in Recro Gainesville LLC v. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc., Civil Action No. 14-1118-GMS (D.Del. February 24, 2017)(consolidated), the Court, following a three-day bench trial and having considered the entire record in the case and the applicable law, concluded that Actavis’ proposed ANDA products infringe all of the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,132,096 (“the ‘096 patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 6,902,742 (“the ‘742 patent”). As a result, the Court... More
  • Chief Judge Stark Grants Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of Patent Ineligibility By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Intellectual Ventures I LLC et al. v. Symantec Corp. et al., C.A. No. 13-440-LPS (D.Del. February 13, 2017), the Court granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment of patent ineligibility upon finding that the claims at issue – claims 25 and 33 of U.S. Patent No. 5,537,533 (“the ‘533 patent”) – (1) are directed to an abstract idea, and (2) fail to include any inventive concept sufficient to elevate them... More
  • Judge Andrews Grants in Part Teva’s Motion to Dismiss ANDA Complaint By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al. v. Actavis Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 14-1381-RGA (D.Del. February 8, 2017), the Court granted defendant Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.’s motion to dismiss Counts II and VI of the Complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). With respect to Counts II and VI, Teva argued that it was not a proper defense because “all alleged... More
  • District of Delaware Announces Judge Sue Robinson’s Transition to Senior Judge The United States District Court for the District of Delaware announced that, effective February 3, 2017, the Honorable Sue L. Robinson, transitioned to Senior Judge.  In the announcement, the Court also set forth certain changes to its case assignment practices given Judge Robinson’s transition to a Senior United States District Judge.  In short, Judge Robinson will not be assigned any new criminal cases or new civil cases.  Until the vacancy is filled, all new criminal cases will be assigned to Chief Judge Stark, Judge... More
  • Chief Judge Stark Adopts in Full Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge Burke Granting Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss in Part By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Yodlee, Inc. v. Plaid Technologies Inc., Civil Action No. 14-1445-LPS-CJB (D.Del. January 27, 2017), the Court overruled the objections of both parties and adopted in full the Report and Recommendation previously entered by United States Magistrate Judge Christopher J. Burke concluding that defendant’s motion to dismiss the asserted patent infringement claims should be granted in part and denied in part for the reasons set forth in Judge Burke’s detailed... More
  • Judge Sleet Grants Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement in Patent Action By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Gregory M. Sleet in Quest Licensing Corp. v. Bloomberg L.P. et al., Civil Action No. 14-561-GMS (D.Del., January 19, 2017), the Court granted Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,194,468 (“the ‘468 patent”). By way of background, the ‘468 patent discloses an apparatus and method enabling a subscriber to receive via mobile telecommunications network information that is updated in real time such as financial market information. Id. at *2.... More
  • Chief Judge Stark Denies Motion to Stay in Kraft v. Heartland Infringement Action Pending Ruling on Venue by U.S. Supreme Court By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC v. TC Heartland, LLC et al., Civil Action No. 14-28-LPS, the Court denied the Heartland defendants’ motion to stay all case-dispositive matters in the patent infringement action, including dispositive pre-trial rulings and the trial, pending the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on the venue issue before it through its granting of the Heartland defendants’ petition for a writ of certiorari on December 14,... More
  • Chief Judge Stark Grants Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of No Willful Infringement By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Vehicle IP, LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, et al., Civil Action No. 09-1007-LPS (D.Del., December 30, 2016), the Court granted defendants Telecommunication Systems, Inc., Networks in Motion, Inc., and Cellco Partnership (collectively, the “TCS Defendants”) motion for partial summary judgment of no willful infringement and denied a number of other motions to exclude and motions for summary judgment or partial summary judgment filed by the parties. In evaluating the TCS... More
  • Happy Holidays! Happy Holidays!... More
  • Judge Robinson Grants Takeda’s Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment and Resurrects Previously Dismissed Patent Infringement Action By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Sue L. Robinson in Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. v. West-Ward Pharmaceutical Corp., Civil Action No. 14-1268-SLR (D.Del., December 14, 2016), the Court granted plaintiff Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc.’s motion filed pursuant to Rules 59(e) and 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure seeking to (1) reopen the judgment of dismissal of the action previously entered under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim and (2) to amend the complaint. In evaluating Takeda’s... More