Judge Andrews construes claim terms relating to system for electronic distribution of shareholder solicitation messages.

In Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc. v. Inveshare, Inc., C.A. No. 10-75-RGA (D. Del. Apr. 11, 2012), Judge Andrews construed the following nine terms found in U.S. Patent No. 7,475,817 which claims “a system for the electronic distribution of shareholder solicitation messages”: 1. “Electronic Solicitation Message [that provides shareholder access to a solicitation content]” 2. “SolicitationContinue reading “Judge Andrews construes claim terms relating to system for electronic distribution of shareholder solicitation messages.”

Judge Andrews grants stay in “classic case” for stay pending reexamination.

In a recent memorandum order in Round Rock Research LLC v. Dole Food Co. Inc., et al., C.A. Nos. 11-1239 (Dole), 11-1241 (Gap), 11-1242 (Hanesbrands) (RGA) (D. Del. Apr. 6, 2012), Judge Andrews granted the defendants’ motions to stay pending ex parte reexamination, finding that the posture of the litigation was “pretty close to theContinue reading “Judge Andrews grants stay in “classic case” for stay pending reexamination.”

Judge Andrews Grants Motion to Transfer Where Plaintiff is the “Equivalent of a Non-Delaware Corporation” and Balance of Convenience Favors Transfer

In Signal Tech, LLC v. Analog Devices, Inc., C.A. No. 11-1073-RGA, Judge Andrews recently granted defendant’s motion to transfer concluding that the “balance of convenience” factors favored transfer. Id. at 8. Plaintiff in this case is a Delaware limited liability company, which was formed less than two months before filing suit for patent infringement againstContinue reading “Judge Andrews Grants Motion to Transfer Where Plaintiff is the “Equivalent of a Non-Delaware Corporation” and Balance of Convenience Favors Transfer”

Judge Andrews Reviews Objections to Counterclaims and Applies New Federal Circuit Standard

In Quantum Loyalty Systems Inc. v. TPG Rewards Inc., C.A. No. 09-22-RGA (D. Del. April 4, 2012), Judge Andrews reviewed the findings of a Magistrate Judge, after the plaintiffs filed objections to those findings.  Judge Andrews first found that two of the plaintiffs’ objections were subject to review for abuse of discretion and that thereContinue reading “Judge Andrews Reviews Objections to Counterclaims and Applies New Federal Circuit Standard”

Judge Andrews Issues Claim Construction for Patent Directed to Dynamic Logic Circuit Technology, Rejects Argument That Disputed Claim Terms Are Indefinite

In AVM Technologies, LLC v. Intel Corporation, C.A. No. 10-610-RGA, Judge Andrews recently issued a claim construction opinion construing claim terms for U.S. Patent No. 5,859,547 (“the ‘574 Patent”), which is a patent that claims “an improved dynamic logic circuit ‘that has increased speed and reduced power.’” Id. at 2 (citation omitted). In the opinion,Continue reading “Judge Andrews Issues Claim Construction for Patent Directed to Dynamic Logic Circuit Technology, Rejects Argument That Disputed Claim Terms Are Indefinite”

Judge Andrews Construes Claim Terms in Patent Dispute Involving Semiconductor LED Technology

In Cree, Inc. v. SemiLEDS Corporation, C.A. No. 10-866-RGA, Judge Andrews recently issued a claim construction opinion construing claim terms for five patents-in-suit involving semiconductor light emitting diode (“LED”) technology used for general lighting purposes. In the opinion, the Court construed the following terms: “dominant wavelength” “area” “radiant flux” “sidewall” “layer” “reflector layer” “ohmic contactContinue reading “Judge Andrews Construes Claim Terms in Patent Dispute Involving Semiconductor LED Technology”

Judge Andrews’ Claim Construction in ADHD Drug Generic Case

  Judge Andrews recently issued a claim construction opinion in Shire LLC’s case against Teva Pharmaceuticals regarding a generic form of the pediatric ADHD drug Intuniv.  Shire LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., C.A. No. 10-329-RGA (March 22, 2012).  Judge Andrews construed the following terms of the three patents-in-suit: -    “without inducing excessive sedation” -   Continue reading “Judge Andrews’ Claim Construction in ADHD Drug Generic Case”

Judge Andrews Distinguishes Link_A_Media, Denies Transfer to N.D. Cal.

Judge Andrews recently considered defendants’ motions to transfer in cases brought by patent owner Robocast against both Apple and Microsoft. See Robocast, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., C.A. No. 11-235-RGA (D. Del. Feb. 24, 2012). Although the cases are separate, both complaints alleged infringement of the same patent, and Microsoft admitted that its transfer motion “risesContinue reading “Judge Andrews Distinguishes Link_A_Media, Denies Transfer to N.D. Cal.”

Judge Andrews finds no personal jurisdiction over 7 of 8 defendants, denies jurisdictional discovery.

Today, Judge Andrews issued a memorandum opinion finding that the Court could not exercise personal jurisdiction over seven of eight defendants. Serverside Group Limited, et al. v. CPI Card Group – Minnesota Inc., et al., C.A. No. 11-559-RGA (D. Del. Feb. 17, 2012). The plaintiffs in the case were an English company and a NewContinue reading “Judge Andrews finds no personal jurisdiction over 7 of 8 defendants, denies jurisdictional discovery.”

Judge Andrews: Allegations directed at “prospective products” survive 12(b)(6) motion.

In a recent memorandum opinion, the Court held that a plaintiff’s allegations that a defendant’s “prospective products” “infringe or will infringe” and “are or will be based on [a plaintiff’s] trade secrets” stated a claim for relief. XpertUniverse, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., C.A. No. 09-157-RGA (D. Del. Jan. 20, 2012). The Court noted, however,Continue reading “Judge Andrews: Allegations directed at “prospective products” survive 12(b)(6) motion.”