Recent Developments in Delaware Corporate Law
We are pleased to provide Richards Layton clients and friends with this publication, which highlights recent corporate and alternative entity cases and statutory developments in Delaware. This publication continues our long tradition of providing insight into the development of Delaware law. Our attorneys have provided our clients with a concise quarterly update on Delaware law for…
Judge Andrews Grants Defendant’s Motion for Costs but Not Attorneys’ Fees, Finding the Case “Unexceptional”
In Pragmatus Telecom LLC v. Newegg Inc., C.A. No. 12-1533-RGA (D. Del. Feb. 18, 2016), Judge Andrews granted defendant Newegg Inc.’s (“Newegg”) request for costs but not attorneys’ fees. Plaintiff Pragmatus Telecom LLC (“Pragmatus”) had brought suit against Newegg, a customer of the suppliers of the allegedly infringing technology. After the suppliers settled with Pragmatus, Pragmatus…
Judge Stark Places One-Way Restrictions on In-House Access to Confidential Discovery Material
In Elm 3DS Innovations, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., C.A. No. 14-1430-LPS-CJB (D. Del. Feb. 11, 2016), Chief Judge Stark rejected plaintiff Elm 3DS Innovations, LLC’s (“Elm”) request to allow its settlement counsel to review defendants’ confidential information. Elm argued that defendants had a larger amount of confidential information than it, and as a result would…
Judge Andrews Schedules Separate Infringement and Invalidity Trials
During the Rule 16(b) scheduling conference in a number of related Hatch-Waxman actions filed by AstraZeneca entities (C.A. Nos. 15-999-RGA, 15-1000, 15-1001, 15-1002, 15-1012, 15-1041, 15-1056, 15-1057, 15-1058) (D. Del Feb. 10, 2016), the Court consolidated the cases for the purpose of invalidity, scheduling separate invalidity (one for all defendants) and infringement (one for each defendant)…
Judge Andrews Partially Lifts Stay Pending IPR After Institution Decision
In Chestnut Hill Sound Inc. v. Apple Inc., C.A. No. 15-261-RGA (D. Del. Jan. 28, 2016), Judge Andrews granted plaintiff Chestnut Hill Sound Inc.’s (“Chestnut Hill’s”) request to partially lift a stay pending inter partes review. Defendant Apple Inc., which filed two petitions covering all asserted claims of the patents-in-suit, had moved to stay…
Judge Robinson Denies Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction Without Prejudice
In DNA Genotek Inc. v. Spectrum DNA, C.A. No. 15-661 (D. Del. Feb. 4, 2016), Judge Robinson denied a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction filed by defendants Spectrum DNA, Spectrum Solutions LLC, and Spectrum Packaging LLC (collectively, “Spectrum”), with leave to renew following jurisdictional discovery. Plaintiff DNA Genotek Inc. (“Genotek”) initiated the patent…
Judge Sleet Grants Stay of Action Filed as “Protective Measure”
In Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Hospira, Inc., C.A. No. 15-264-GMS (D. Del. Feb. 19, 2016), Judge Sleet granted plaintiffs Helsinn Healthcare S.A. and Roche Palo Alto’s motion to stay their second-filed Hatch Waxman case pending the outcome of a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction in their first-filed action. Plaintiffs filed the second…
Judge Andrews Dismisses Induced, Contributory, and Willful Infringement Claims
In Bradium Technologies, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., C.A. No. 15-31-RGA (D. Del. Feb. 2, 2016), Judge Andrews granted in part defendant Microsoft Corporation’s (“Microsoft”) motion to dismiss plaintiff Bradium Technologies, LLC’s (“Bradium”) indirect and willful infringement claims. Microsoft argued that the allegations of the complaint were conclusory, and failed to allege sufficient facts of pre-suit…
Delaware Intellectual Property Law Update
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.
Judge Andrews Denies in Part Defendants’ Motion to Redact Hearing Transcript
In M2M Solutions LLC v. Motorola Solutions Inc., C.A. No. 12-33-RGA (D. Del. Feb. 2, 2016), Judge Andrews denied in part defendants Telit Communications PLC and Telit Wireless Solutions Inc.’s (“Telit”) motion to redact the transcript of a hearing, permitting redactions only to those sections of the transcript discussing a third-party license agreement, profits, and royalties,…