Chief Judge Stark Addresses Erroneous Jury Instruction

Chief Judge Stark recently was faced with a motion for final judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 following a jury verdict of induced infringement. The parties in the case agreed that the instruction given to the jury on inducement was erroneous in light of a related litigation between the same parties in which theContinue reading “Chief Judge Stark Addresses Erroneous Jury Instruction”

Judge Andrews invalidates patent under 101

Judge Richard G. Andrews recently granted a motion for summary judgment that the asserted claims of a patented “apparatus, method and database for control of audio/video equipment” is invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101.   D&M Holdings Inc. v. Sonos, Inc., C.A. No. 16-141-RGA (D. Del. Feb. 20, 2018).  The Court agreed with the defendant thatContinue reading “Judge Andrews invalidates patent under 101”

Chief Judge Stark Finds Patent Not Enabled, Sets Aside Jury Verdict

In December 2016, a Delaware jury found that Gilead had failed to prove the asserted patent in this case was invalid and awarded damages of $2.54 billion. But Chief Judge Stark has now granted Gilead’s motion for judgment as a matter of law that the asserted claims are not enabled. Although Gilead also moved forContinue reading “Chief Judge Stark Finds Patent Not Enabled, Sets Aside Jury Verdict”

Judiciary Committee Holds Hearing on Nominations for the District of Delaware

Today the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing on the nominations of Colm F. Connolly and Maryellen Noreika to be United States District Judges for the District of Delaware, bringing the District of Delaware one step closer to returning to full strength. The nominations will next be voted on by theContinue reading “Judiciary Committee Holds Hearing on Nominations for the District of Delaware”

Chief Judge Stark considers venue motions

In two opinions issued the same day, Chief Judge Leonard P. Stark considered motions to transfer venue in light of TC Heartland and the Federal Circuit’s recent pronouncement on the venue defense in In re Micron Tech, Inc., 875 F.3d 1091 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Koninklijke KPN N.V. v. Kyocera Corporation, et al., C.A. No. 17-87-LPS-CJBContinue reading “Chief Judge Stark considers venue motions”

Judge Andrews Grants-in-Part Daubert Challenge to Damages Expert

Judge Andrews recently issued a memorandum order ruling on the Defendants’ motion to exclude testimony of Plaintiffs’ damages expert in MiiCs & Partners, Inc., et al. v. Funai Electric Co., Ltd., et al., C.A. No. 14-804-RGA, Memo. Or. (D. Del. Dec. 7, 2017). The Defendants lodged several challenges to the Plaintiffs’ expert’s opinion. First, JudgeContinue reading “Judge Andrews Grants-in-Part Daubert Challenge to Damages Expert”

Judge Andrews grants motion for reconsideration on whether plaintiff’s Global Head of IP should have access to Defendant’s ANDA

On August 24, 2017, in Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Civ. No. 17-435-RGA, Judge Richard G. Andrews ruled that it would be inappropriate to add plaintiff’s Global Head of IP as an in-house designee under the protective order, finding that such person was a competitive decision maker.  See previous Order here.  On December 11, 2017,Continue reading “Judge Andrews grants motion for reconsideration on whether plaintiff’s Global Head of IP should have access to Defendant’s ANDA”

Judge Bryson makes pre-trial rulings regarding Plaintiff’s damages expert and secondary considerations evidence

In Sonos, Inc. v. D&M Holdings Inc. d/b/a The D+M Group, et al., C.A. No. 14-1330-WCB (D. Del. Dec. 7, 2017) (Apportionment Order), Judge William C. Bryson denied Plaintiff’s motion for leave to submit a second supplemental report from its damages expert because the supplemental report failed to conduct a proper apportionment analysis.  The CourtContinue reading “Judge Bryson makes pre-trial rulings regarding Plaintiff’s damages expert and secondary considerations evidence”