Case Name: Schrader-Bridgeport International, Inc. et al v. Continental Automotive Systems US, Inc.
Docket Number: 2:12-cv-10715-SJM-MJH
Date Filed: 2/16/2012
Judge: Hon. Stephen J. Murphy, III
Schrader-Bridgeport and Schrader Electronics (collectively, the “Plaintiffs”), filed suit against Continental Automotive Systems US, Inc. (“Defendant”) asserting that the Defendant had violated U.S. Patent No. 7,518,495 (“the ‘495 patent”) entitled “Universal Tire Pressure Monitor”. The ‘495 patent generally describes a monitor for use in a remote tire pressure monitoring system for the vehicle. Continental proceeded to file a counterclaim alleging infringement of four of Continental’s patents. Separate Markman hearings were held for the original complaint and counterclaim. The Plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment of “no validity” of the ‘495 patent and a motion for partial summary judgment of literal infringement regarding the ‘495 patent. While the Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment for invalidity of the ‘495 patent and a motion for partial summary judgment related to literal infringement. A hearing was held on April 28, 2014 for all motions relating to summary judgment.
The orders related to such motions are under seal, however, according to court records, the court granted the sealed motion for summary judgment of invalidity in part for lack of enablement under 35 U.S.C. § 112, denied the motion for partial summary judgment of “no invalidity,” and denied the motion for partial summary judgment of literal infringement as moot based on the erroneous Lack of Enablement judgment. On June 17, 2014, the court dismissed the case with prejudice. An appeal was filed on July 7, 2014 by Plaintiffs appealing rulings on the summary judgment motions. As of July 8, 2014, a motion to extend time to file motions for attorney fees by the Defendant state that the Plaintiff and Defendant were in settlement discussions. On March 18, 2015, Plaintiffs with the consent of Defendant filed a motion for vacatur and dismissal of all claims with prejudice and closure of the action subject to the terms of a settlement agreement. On March 31, 2015, Plaintiffs’ motion was granted and an order was issued by the Hon. Stephen J. Murphy, III dismissing the claims with prejudice.