We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 416

Motion to strike "errata sheets" to deposition testimony granted where plaintiff's expert witnesses changed answers from "no" to "yes"

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 26 2014

In this patent infringement action, the defendant filed a motion to strike the "errata sheets" to deposition testimony of two of plaintiffs' expert

Daubert challenge to damage expert denied where contested matters were for cross-examination and not proper for exclusion

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 19 2014

In this patent infringement action, Apple challenged the opinions of the plaintiff's damage expert on several bases, including the determination of a

Motion to reconsider Claim Construction Order on indefiniteness after Nautilus denied where district court found term definite

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 17 2014

Defendant Stealth Cam, LLC ("Stealth Cam") requested that the district court reconsider its Claim Construction Order holding that the term "extending

Defendant ordered to provide access to licensee websites

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 12 2014

BNB Health Grades, Inc. ("Health Grades") filed a patent infringement action against MDx Medical, Inc., dba Vitals.com ("MDx"). During the

Production of billing statements from law firm denied even though deponent could not recall details of why information was not disclosed to PTO

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 10 2014

The defendants in this patent infringement action sought the production of certain billing statements of the law firm representing CleanTech. The

The future of inducing infringement claims after Limelight v. Akamai

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 5 2014

In Limelight v. Akamai, the United States Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit's precedent holding that inducing infringement claims did not

District Court precludes deposition of in-house counsel who acted as part of trial team even though counsel had relevant, non-privileged conversations regarding indemnity

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 5 2014

After plaintiff, McAirlaids, requested the deposition of one of Kimberly-Clark's ("K-C") in-house litigation counsel, K-C filed a motion for a

District court denies motion to file amended complaint to add direct infringement claim

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 3 2014

Plaintiff Kaneka Corporation ("Plaintiff") filed a patent infringement against SKC Kolon PI, Inc. ("SKPI" or "Defendant") and SKC, Inc. ("SKC

District court denies Daubert motion based on VirnetX as exceeding the district court's role as gatekeeper

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 29 2014

In this patent infringement action, Adobe filed a Daubert motion seeking to exclude the plaintiff's damage expert largely based on VirnetX, Inc. v

District court precludes admission of inter partes review proceedings in front of jury but permits consideration as part of willfulness determination

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 22 2014

In this patent infringement action between Ultratec, Inc. ("Ultratec") and Sorenson Communications, Inc. ("Sorenson"), Sorenson sought to admit