Judge Jordan Denies Fees and Exceptional Case Application

Judge Jordan recently issued an opinion denying an exceptional case finding after having entered partial summary judgment against the plaintiff and excluding the plaintiff’s direct infringement damages theory. “Viewed in its totality,” Judge Jordan found, the plaintiff’s “conduct over the course of this case does not qualify as exceptional . . . [the plaintiff] succeeded

Judge Kent A. Jordan: Summary Judgment of Invalidity Granted; Claim Construction of “Purchase Transaction”

In Stored Value Solutions, Inc. v. Card Activation Technologies, Inc., C.A. No. 09-495-KAJ (D. Del. Jul. 1, 2011), Third Circuit Judge Kent A. Jordan, sitting by designation, issued a memorandum opinion granting the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment of invalidity due to anticipation and obviousness. Id. at 2. Judge Jordan also granted the plaintiff’s motion

Kent A. Jordan: “Field of Use” Exclusivity Argument Unsupported by License Agreement

Third Circuit Judge Kent A. Jordan, sitting by designation, has issued an interesting decision on exclusivity as it relates to licensee standing. Despite the “semi-exclusive” language in its agreement with the patentholder, the licensee argued that it had standing to sue because the license granted it rights in an exclusive field of use. The Court

Damages Decision Issues in Novozymes v. Genencor Litigation

In one of his last acts as a district judge, now-Third Circuit Judge Kent A. Jordan last week issued a post-trial damages opinion in the Novozymes v. Genencor litigation. In its decision, the Court touched on a range of subjects, including questions of standing, willfulness, and permanent injunctive relief. Subsidiary Standing. The Court recognized that,

Two Statements of Note…

Two statements of note in a recent decision by Judge Jordan (, C.A. No. 05-141 (D. Del. Jan. 19, 2007) (Jordan, J.): – An inventor’s testimony regarding the meaning of a piece of prior art will be given little or no consideration (as with claim construction) since the testimony is often self-serving. Id. at 12

Judge Kent A. Jordan: Phillips Fee Award Revisited Again

In a follow-up to an October 23, 2006 decision in the same case awarding attorneys’; fees to Sullivan and Cromwell, Judge Jordan awarded Potter Anderson and Corroon LLP attorneys; fees in the amount of $66,764.90 for 312.90 hours of work during April 2004. Our write-up of the October decision is available here. In the October

Court Will Not “Rethink” Decision it Already Made

Reminder: a motion for reconsideration is not the tool for raising additional arguments, facts or issues you could have raised during initial briefing of an issue. On October 26, 2006 Judge Jordan issued a claim construction opinion in ., C.A. No. 04-1373. Ampex subsequently moved for reargument or reconsideration of the construction of one claim

Kodak Survives Summary Judgment Motion on Obviousness

, C.A. No. 04-1373-KAJ (D. Del. Nov. 3, 2006). Plaintiff Ampex Corp. moved the Court for partial summary judgment that the patent at issue was not invalid (a.k.a. valid) based on several combinations of prior art references. Ampex argued that the proponent of obviousness is required to present an element-by-element comparison of the claims to

Attempt to “Disqualify” Prior Art at Summary Judgment Stage Denied

The drafting of jury instructions is an arduous task, but in a recent opinion, Judge Jordan’s ruling makes carefully constructed jury instructions a must for purposes of appeal. In ., C.A. No. 04-1373 (D. Del. Nov. 2, 2006) (Jordan, J.), Ampex moved for summary judgment that certain pieces of prior art were not in fact

Kodak Prevails on Non-Infringement Defense

Eastman Kodak Co. has prevailed in its defense of a competitor’s accusations of infringement involving the company’s digital-image technology. A day after denying the company’s motion for summary judgment on inequitable conduct, the Delaware court issued an opinion granting Kodak’s similar motion on non-infringment. Ampex brought the infringement claim against Kodak seeking to protect its