Judge Kearney denies motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and motion for improper venue

In Prowire LLC v. Apple, Inc., C.A. No. 17-223-MAK (D. Del. Aug. 9, 2017), Judge Mark A. Kearney denied Defendant’s motion to dismiss based on allegedly insufficient allegations of infringement as well as is motion to dismiss for improper venue, where Defendant argued that Plaintiff had not shown it has  “regular and established place of business” in Delaware.

In finding Plaintiff’s complaint sufficient, the Court was guided by case law from this District holding that a complaint must provide sufficient information to allow the court to “determine plausibility and [] defendant to respond to the complaint,” rejected the premise that the complaint must always be detailed, and declined to reach the question of whether a complaint must plead infringement of every element/limitation of a patent’s claim. Id. at 4-5.  The Court also rejected Defendant’s argument that it should disregard allegations made “on information and belief.” Id. at 6-7.

As to venue, the Court’s opinion focused on the argument that Defendant had no regular and established place of business in Delaware. Defendant did “not dispute [Plaintiff’s] allegation it has a retail store in Delaware, it argues one retail store is not enough to establish a ‘permanent and continuous presence.’ We disagree; [Defendant’s] retail store is a permanent and continuous presence where it sells the alleged infringing technology to consumers on a daily basis. [Defendant] does not meet its burden of showing it does not have ‘a regular and established place of business’ in this District.” Id. at 9.

Prowire LLC v. Apple, Inc., C.A. No. 17-223-MAK (D. Del. Aug. 9, 2017)


%d bloggers like this: