Complex Commercial Litigation Update
This quarter, the CCLD addressed a number of disputes arising from business acquisitions.
This quarter, the CCLD addressed a number of disputes arising from business acquisitions.
In In re Bracket Holding Corp. Litigation, C.A. No. N15C-02-233 WCC CCLD, Judge Carpenter decided three motions to dismiss on various issues. The genesis of the instant dispute began in 2012, when Express Scripts, Inc. indicated its interest in acquiring United BioSource LLC. In 2013, Parthenon Capital Partners, a private equity fund, formed Bracket Holding Corp.…
In Acceleration Bay LLC v. Activision Blizzard, Inc., C.A. No. 16-453-RGA (D. Del Aug. 29, 2017), Judge Andrews denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s patent infringement claims. In their motion to dismiss, the defendants argued that all claims of the patents at issue were invalid for lack of patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C.…
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 Indenix Pharmaceutical LLC and Universita Degli Studi di Cagliari v. Gilead Sciences, Inc., C.A. No. 14-846-LPS (D. Del. Sept. 22, 2017), Chief Judge Stark considered a motion for enhanced damages filed by Indenix Pharmaceuticals LLC after a jury found Gilead Sciences, Inc. liable for infringement. The jury awarded Indenix $2.54 billion, and the Court awarded…
In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. and Pfizer v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., C.A. No. 17-379-LPS (D. Del. Sept. 11, 2017), Chief Judge Stark considered a motion to dismiss for improper venue. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (“MPI”) was sued by Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. and Pfizer Co. (collectively, “BMS”) for patent infringement after its ANDA filing for a generic version of…
In Cosmo Technologies Limited v. Lupin Ltd., C.A. No. 15-669-LPS (D. Del. Sept. 14, 2017), Chief Judge Stark denied the defendants’ motion to strike portions of the plaintiffs’ expert reports. The defendants argued that they were not on notice of the information provided in the expert reports, including the expert’s visual observations, and that the expert…
In Boston Scientific Corporation and Boston Scientific SciMed, Inc. v. Cook Group Incorporated and Cook Medical LLC, C.A. No. 15-980-LPS-CJB, Chief Judge Stark granted the defendants’ motion to transfer venue, holding that the defendants did not have a regular and established place of business in Delaware. Plaintiffs Boston Scientific Corporation and Boston SciMed, Inc. initiated this…
In Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. T-Mobile USA Inc., et al., C.A. No. 13-1632-LPS (D. Del. Aug. 29, 2017), Chief Judge Stark decided four summary judgment motions on various issues. This group of six patent infringement actions involved plaintiffs Intellectual Ventures I and Intellectual Ventures II (collectively, “IV”), and defendants T-Mobile USA, Inc., T-Mobile US, Inc.,…
In In re AE Liquidation, 2017 WL 3319963 (3d Cir. Aug. 4, 2017) (the “Third Circuit Opinion” or “AE Liquidation”), the Third Circuit held that a WARN Act notice only must be given when mass layoffs are probable, not when merely foreseeable. As a result, a debtor that was attempting to effectuate a going concern sale…