Elm 3DS Innovations, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al., C.A. No. 14-1430 – LPS- CJB, March 31, 2016.

Stark, C. J. Defendants’ objections to the magistrate’s report and recommendation are overruled and defendants’ motion is denied.

Defendants contend that the report erred in finding that the factual allegations provided a plausible basis for inferring induced infringement because it incorrectly concluded that defendants had actual knowledge of the patent-in-suit before the lawsuit was filed and that they specifically intended to encourage infringement. The court cannot say at this stage whether defendants’ knowledge of the patent-in-suit may not be inferred from their participation in the semiconductor market where it was common knowledge. This it finds no error in the magistrate’s decision.  The court further disagrees that the report erred in finding defendant’s knowledge of and intent to induce infringement.