Delaware Intellectual Property Law Update

August 24, 2018

Publication| Intellectual Property

Welcome to the latest edition of the Richards, Layton & Finger Intellectual Property Law Update. As always, if you have questions about any of the decisions listed below or the District of Delaware in general, please let us know.

Senate Confirms Judicial Nominees 
On August 1, 2018, the United States Senate confirmed the nominations of Colm F. Connolly and Maryellen Noreika to be United States District Judges for the District of Delaware. The nominations had been pending since December of 2017. Connolly and Noreika will fill the judicial vacancies created by now-retired Judge Sue L. Robinson’s taking of senior status in February of 2017 and Judge Gregory M. Sleet’s taking of senior status in May of 2017.  The new judges were sworn in during private ceremonies and have begun to be assigned new cases since August 15.  A copy of the announcement can be viewed HERE.

District Court Releases Annual Report to the Federal Bar Association
The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware has issued its Annual Report to the Federal Bar Association.  The report states that 947 new patent cases have been filed in the District of Delaware in the 13 months since the Supreme Court’s decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, a 64% percent increase as compared to the 13 months preceding Heartland.  In 2017, intellectual property litigation constituted 43% of civil case filings in the District.  A copy of the report can be viewed HERE.

District Court and Federal Bar Association to Hold Celebration in Honor of Judge Sleet
The District Court and the Delaware Chapter of the Federal Bar Association will be holding a retirement celebration and an official portrait presentation in honor of Judge Gregory M. Sleet at the Hotel DuPont in Wilmington, Delaware, on September 14, 2018, starting at 6 p.m.  Registration information can be viewed HERE.

Chief Judge Stark Denies Motion for Preliminary Injunction to Prevent Launch of Generic Product
In Noven Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Mylan Technologies Inc., No. 17-1777-LPS (D. Del. Aug. 20, 2018), Chief Judge Stark declined to preliminarily enjoin the defendants from launching a generic version of the plaintiff’s pharmaceutical product but granted a temporary restraining order that would expire within two days unless additional relief was granted by the Court or the Federal Circuit.  
Read More >>

Chief Judge Stark Denies Motion for Preliminary Injunction
In Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corp. v. Siemens Industry, Inc., No. 17-1687-LPS (D. Del. Aug. 2, 2018), Chief Judge Stark denied the plaintiff’s motion to preliminarily enjoin the defendant from selling a component for a train control system alleged to infringe the patent-in-suit.  Although the Court concluded that the plaintiff was likely to prevail on its infringement claims, the Court also found it likely that the defendant would prove that the asserted patent was invalid.
Read More >>

Judge Andrews Denies Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint for Failure to State a Claim
In F2VS Technologies, LLC v. Ruckus Wireless, Inc., No. 17-756-RGA (D. Del. July 31, 2018), Judge Andrews denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s second amended complaint for failure to state a claim.  
Read More >>

Chief Judge Stark Rules that Invalidity Expert Cannot View Highly Confidential Information
In Gillette Co. v. Dollar Shave Club, Inc., No. 15-1158-LPS-CJB (D. Del. July 23, 2018), Chief Judge Stark denied the defendants’ request to overrule the plaintiffs’ objection to the disclosure of their highly confidential information to the defendants’ invalidity expert.  
Read More >>

Judge Andrews Denies Motion in Limine Regarding Reference’s Status as Prior Art
In AstraZeneca L.P. v. Sigmapharm Laboratories, LLC, No. 15-1000-RGA (D. Del. July 6, 2018), Judge Andrews denied the plaintiffs’ motion in limine to exclude from trial an obviousness reference alleged to be prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(d), but reserved the ability to revisit the issue after trial.
Read More >>

Judge Andrews Denies Daubert Motion 
In Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC, No. 15-1152-RGA (D. Del. July 6, 2018), Judge Andrews denied the plaintiffs’ Daubert motion to exclude testimony of the defendant’s expert.  According to the Court, whether the expert was opining beyond the scope of his expertise would be better addressed during trial, since the case would be tried to the bench.  
Read More >>

Chief Judge Stark Grants Motion to Supplement Complaint After Certificate of Correction
In Ethicon LLC v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc., No. 17-871-LPS (D. Del. June 28, 2018), Chief Judge Stark granted the plaintiffs’ motion to file a second supplemental complaint prompted by the issuance of a certificate of correction to one of the asserted patents. 
Read More >>

Magistrate Judge Burke Recommends Finding that Venue Defense Was Forfeited 
In Princeton Digital Image Corp. v. Ubisoft Entertainment SA, No. 13-335-LPS-CJB (D. Del. June 25, 2018), Magistrate Judge Burke recommended that the Court deny defendant Ubisoft Inc.’s motion to dismiss for improper venue.  
Read More >>

• Related practices

  Intellectual Property