In Goggin, a member of East Coast Miner LLC (ECM) brought suit against ECM’s manager and his associates challenging several allegedly self-dealing transactions. The plaintiff alleged, among other things, that ECM’s manager had caused ECM’s part ownership of specified assets to be diverted to different entities that the manager and his associates owned and controlled. The…

In SZ DJI Technology Co. v. Autel Robotics USA LLC, No. 16-706-LPS (D. Del. Mar. 14, 2018), Chief Judge Stark granted the defendants’ motion to consolidate this action with a case transferred from the Western District of Washington. The plaintiffs argued in opposition that the two cases concerned distinct inventions with little overlap, but Chief Judge…

This update provides short updates on judicial decisions, trends, and notable events in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, traditionally one of the three busiest jurisdictions for intellectual property litigation.

In Interface Linx, LLC v. Onkyo USA Corp., No. 17-1099-LPS (D. Del. April 13, 2018), and related actions, Chief Judge Stark ordered the defendants to produce sales data for the accused products dating back to six years before the date of the suit. The defendants had resisted production of the sales information on grounds of relevance,…

In MorphoSys AG v. Janssen Biotech, Inc., No. 16-221-LPS (D. Del. Apr. 19, 2018), Chief Judge Stark granted the defendants’ motion to amend their pleadings to assert inequitable conduct. The Court found that the proposed amended answers and counterclaims sufficiently alleged that certain individuals having a duty of candor failed to disclose information material to patentability…

In Genentech, Inc. v. Amgen Inc., No. 17-1407-GMS (D. Del. Apr. 17, 2018), and related action, Judge Sleet granted Amgen Inc.’s motions to dismiss the plaintiffs’ declaratory judgment claim for failure to state a claim and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. According to the decision, during the pre-litigation BPCIA “patent dance,” Amgen had stated that…

In Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A. Inc. v. West-Ward Pharmaceutical Corp., No. 14-1268-RGA-SRF (D. Del. Apr. 12, 2018), Magistrate Judge Fallon denied the defendants’ motion to quash a subpoena noticed by the plaintiff, Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. One of the defendants had earlier noticed the 30(b)(6) deposition of the subpoena recipient, and the defendants argued that Takeda’s subpoena…

In Princeton Digital Image Corp. v. Ubisoft Entertainment SA, No. 13-335-LPS-CJB (D. Del. Apr. 20, 2018), Magistrate Judge Burke granted the plaintiff’s request to compel defendant Ubisoft Inc. to produce summary sales, licensing, costs, and profit information relating to the accused video games and make available a Rule 30(b)(6) witness to testify regarding the requested information.…

In Interface Linx, LLC v. Haier America Co., No. 17-1098-LPS (D. Del. Apr. 26, 2018), and related cases, Chief Judge Stark, ruling from the bench, granted in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss the direct, indirect, and willful infringement claims of the plaintiff, Interface Linx, LLC. The asserted patent covered, inter alia, an HDMI plug and…

In Wi-LAN Inc. v. Sharp Electronics Corp., No. 15-379-LPS (D. Del. May 14, 2018), Chief Judge Stark denied the requests of the plaintiff, Wi-LAN Inc., to compel defendant Sharp Electronics Corp. to produce documents from a subsidiary and a parent corporation. First, Sharp Electronics argued that it had already produced documents from the subsidiary, a manufacturing…