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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 538

District court grants summary judgment of no damages for failure to mark
  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • USA
  • August 26 2015

Plaintiff Juno Manufacturing, LLC ("Plaintiff" or "Juno") filed a patent infringement complaint against Defendant Nora Lighting, Inc. ("Defendant" or


District court denies motion to exclude CEO from providing expert testimony on infringement
  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • USA
  • August 24 2015

Defendant filed a motion to strike plaintiff's expert report on infringement, asserting that the report failed to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P. 26 because


Enovsys v. AT&T: court excludes plaintiff's damage expert for failure to apportion and sua sponte bifurcates trial into liability and damage phases to be tried to different juries
  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • USA
  • August 19 2015

After the court struck plaintiff's damage expert's report for failing to tie damages to the limited feature of the patented invention, the court


In-house counsel ordered to sit for additional deposition after emails improperly withheld on basis of privilege
  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • USA
  • August 13 2015

Sprint Communications Company, L.P., filed a patent-infringement action against Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, Comcast IP Phone, LLC, and Comcast


Smartflash v. Apple: after $500m verdict, district court grants new trial on damages based on improper use of entire market value jury instruction
  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • USA
  • July 20 2015

After a jury returned a verdict against Apple, Apple filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial. The district court subsequently


Motion for judgment on the pleadings based on unpatentability under Section 101 denied where patents were not directed to an abstract idea
  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • USA
  • August 17 2015

Defendants Motorola Mobility, LLC, Amazon.com, Inc., Apple Inc., Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Huawei Device USA, Inc., HTC Corp., HTC America, Inc


Court finds that Rule 26 disclosure and computation of damages insufficient where party failed to explain how it calculated damage number
  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • USA
  • February 24 2014

Orbit Irrigation Products ("Orbit") filed a patent infringement action against Sunhills International ("Sunhills"). After the completion of certain


Divorces, community property and patents the problem of the ex-spouse
  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • USA
  • December 2 2013

Many universities have standard patent assignment agreements that assign inventions of a university employee to the university. But what if the


District court dismisses action after patent is transferred to president of company
  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • USA
  • April 13 2015

After Plaintiff Pi-Net International, Inc. ("Pi-Net") brought suit against Defendants Focus Business Bank and Bridge Bank, N.A. For patent


District court declines to stay proceeding pending inter partes review where plaintiff and defendant were direct competitors
  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • USA
  • March 4 2015

Card-Monroe Corp. ("CMC") manufactures tufting machines and equipment. CMC holds several patents that pertain to its machines and equipment. Tuftco