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 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…

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 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…

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 Ioengine, LLC v. Interactive Media Corp. d/b/a Kanguru Solutions et al., C.A. No. 14-1571-GMS, Judge Sleet construed all disputed terms of the patent-in-suit as having plain and ordinary meaning. In construing the last of four claim terms, the Court declined to “construe terms that are already evident from reading the entire claim.” The Court found…

In Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., et al. v. Merck & Co., Inc., et al., C.A. No. 15-560-GMS (D. Del. Mar. 17, 2016), Judge Sleet denied the defendants’ 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the patent infringement suit for failure to state a claim.  After considering the defendants’ argument that the patent claimed ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §…

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…

In Robert Bosch LLC v. Alberee Products, Inc., C.A. No. 12-574-LPS, Chief Judge Stark granted the motions for summary judgment filed by the defendant Costco Wholesale Corporation (“Costco”) as to non-infringement of some of the patents-in-suit and stayed the case pending briefing on a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s (“Bosch”) complaint as a sanction for Bosch’s…

In Bradium Technologies LLC v. Microsoft Corporation, C.A. No. 15-031-RGA, Judge Andrews entered an electronic discovery order limiting the number of custodians and requiring the parties to serve separate requests for production directed to e-mail. First, the parties disagreed on the number of custodians that the parties should designate, with the plaintiff (Bradium) proposing ten custodians…