In In re Appraisal of Dell Inc., C.A. No. 9322-VCL (Del. Ch. May 11, 2016), the Court held that fourteen mutual funds sponsored by T. Rowe Price & Associates, Inc. (“T. Rowe”) as well as institutions that relied on T. Rowe to direct the voting of their shares (the “T. Rowe Petitioners”) were not entitled to…

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 Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Toshiba Corp., C.A. No. 13-453-SLR (D. Del. Apr. 20, 2016), Judge Robinson scheduled an in-person hearing to ensure that the parties were proceeding through expert discovery with a “discrete set of accused products and the sales figures” at issue. Judge Robinson was concerned that the parties may not have reached…

In Scientific Telecommunications LLC v. ADTRAN, Inc., C.A. No. 15-647-SLR (D. Del. Apr. 25, 2016), Judge Robinson denied defendant ADTRAN, Inc.’s (“ADTRAN”) motion to transfer the case to the Northern District of Alabama. ADTRAN argued that the case should be transferred to Alabama because its headquarters, approximately 1346 employees, and business records were all located in…

In Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. v. Plano Encryption Technologies, LLC, C.A. No. 15-777-LPS-CJB (D. Del. Apr. 25, 2016), a declaratory judgment action, Magistrate Judge Burke concluded in a report and recommendation that the Court did not have personal jurisdiction over the defendant, Plano Encryption Technologies, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (“Plano”). The plaintiff argued…

In Segway, Inc. v. Inventist, Inc., C.A. No. 15-808-SLR (D. Del. Apr. 25, 2016), Judge Robinson denied a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction filed by the defendant, Inventist, Inc. (“Inventist”), a Washington corporation, but granted Inventist’s motion to transfer. In concluding that the Court could exercise personal jurisdiction over Inventist, the Court highlighted…

In YYZ, LLC v. Pegasystems, Inc., C.A. No. 13-581-SLR (D. Del. May 2, 2016), after granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment that the plaintiff’s patents-in-suit were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Judge Robinson denied the defendant’s motion for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Judge Robinson rejected the defendant’s first argument—that the plaintiff…

In ART+COM Innovationpool GmbH v. Google Inc., C.A. No. 14-217-RGA (D. Del. Apr. 28, 2016), Judge Andrews denied defendant Google, Inc.’s (“Google”) motion for summary judgment under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The plaintiff, ART+COM Innovationpool GmbH (“ACI”), alleged that Google infringed a patent describing a software method for representing “space-related data, particularly geographical data of flat…

On April 2, 2015, Delaware Governor Jack Markell signed into law the DelawareRapid Arbitration Act (“Act”). This Act allows for alternative dispute resolutionconsistent with arbitration’s origins as a rapid and efficient means of resolving disputes.The Act responds to growing complaints by Delaware’s companies about theincrustation of costs and delays onto non-judicial dispute resolution. The Act is…

In InterDigital Communications Inc. et al v. ZTE Corporation et al., C.A. No. 13-009-RGA (D. Del. Mar. 18, 2016), Judge Andrews denied the defendants’ renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law or, in the alternative, for a new trial with respect to patents ‘966 and ‘847. Judge Andrews alternatively postponed deciding the defendants’ motion…