Legislation proposing to amend the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware (the “DGCL”) has been released by the Corporate Council of the Corporation Law Section of the Delaware State Bar Association and, if approved by the Corporation Law Section, is expected to be introduced to the Delaware General Assembly.

The Delaware Department of Labor has recently updated the labor law poster that employers are required to display. The new poster reflects the recent law that protects employees from discrimination by employers with four or more employees on the basis of their family care responsibilities and reproductive health decisions

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 Boston Scientific Corporation v. Cook Group Incorporated, C.A. No. 15-980-LPS-CJB (D. Del. Feb. 10, 2017), Magistrate Judge Burke granted and denied in part the parties’ proposed modifications to the inter partes review (“IPR”) provision of the protective order. The Court denied the defendant’s proposal requiring the plaintiff’s outside counsel to withdraw from representing the…

In Endo Pharmaceuticals Solutions, Inc. v. Paddock Laboratories, LLC, C.A. No. 14-1422-SLR (D. Del. Feb. 10, 2017), Judge Robinson held that the testosterone injection patents at issue were not invalid for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. This decision followed an ANDA bench trial on invalidity. Although Judge Robinson credited the defendant with “successfully identif[ying] the…

Following a bench trial in AstraZenca AB v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd., C.A. No. 14-664-GMS (D. Del. Feb. 2, 2017), Judge Sleet determined that the asserted claims of the patent-in-suit were not invalid for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. In light of the trial testimony, Defendant Aurobindo Pharma Ltd. (“Aurobindo”) argued that the asserted claims were…

In Intel Corp. v. Future Link Systems, LLC, C.A. No. 14-377-LPS (D. Del. Jan. 27, 2017), Chief Judge Stark ruled on a number of disputes concerning the parties’ privilege logs. After the initial teleconference, the Court “instructed the parties to ‘pick ten specific entries from the other side’s privilege log’ and then meet and confer regarding…

In Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, C.A. Nos. 12-193-LPS, 13-1632-LPS, 13-1633-LPS, 13-1635-LPS, 13-1636-LPS, 13-1637-LPS, 15-799-LPS, 15-800-LPS (D. Del. Jan. 31, 2017), Chief Judge Stark ruled on four motions to strike portions of expert reports and plaintiff Intellectual Ventures I LLC’s (“IV”) request for reconsideration of the Court’s invalidity ruling in light of recent…

In CallWave Communication LLC v. Verizon Services Corp., C.A. No. 12-1704-RGA (D. Del. Feb. 13, 2017), Judge Andrews granted plaintiff CallWave Communication LLC’s (“Callwave”) motion to enforce a settlement agreement with Telecommunication Systems Inc. (“TCS”). The settlement arose from patent litigation between Callwave and defendants Verizon Services Corp. (“Verizon”) and Google Inc. (“Google”). TCS was the…

In a rare order on the sufficiency of contentions, Chief Judge Stark denied the defendant’s motion to compel supplemental infringement contentions. In Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., C.A. No. 16-246-LPS (D. Del. Jan. 31, 2017), defendant Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (“Teva”) claimed that the plaintiffs’ contentions failed to describe how its ANDA…