* Indicates a required field.

Morris James Blogs

Disputed terms are construed in case relating to bed rail systems

Regalo International, LLC v. Munchkin, Inc., C.A. No. 15-1103 – LPS-CJB, December 6, 2016.

Stark, C. J.   Claim construction opinion issues regarding nine terms from three patents.  A Markman hearing took place on October 7, 2016.

The disputed technology relates to bed rail systems that can be used to prevent a child from falling out of bed. The following terms were considered:

1. vertical support members

2. engaged to, engaging between, engaging, engage

3. rail portion

4. wherein the rail portion and the leg portion can be relatively swingable to each other and away from each other

5. wherein the rail portion and the leg portion can be relatively drawn to each other and away from each other

6. tubular portion

7. sleeve

8. sheeting

9. predefined acute angle

Disputes regarding objections to admission of deposition designations at trial are overruled

Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC et al v. Gilead Sciences Inc. et al.,  C.A. Nos. 13-19897-LPS, 14-109-LPS, 14-846-LPS, December 4, 2016.

Stark, C. J. Defendants’ objections to deposition testimony to be used at trial are overruled; plaintiffs’ objections to counterdesignations are likewise overruled.

The parties have not presented their disputes as required by the pretrial order and have been waived due to noncompliance. The PTO permits only one sentence per objection.  Defendants’ objections with respect to 8 designations are also overruled for additional reasons. Plaintiffs have not supported their objections to the couterdesignations. A vague reference to “protective order issues” does not constitute a meritorious objection.

Terms are construed in virtual reality case

Princeton Digital Image Corporation v. Harmonix Music Systems Inc. et al., C.A. Nos. 12-1461-LPS-CJB, 13-335-LPS-CJB, December 2, 2016.

Burke, M. J.   Claim construction report and recommendation issued regarding two terms from one patent.  A Markman hearing took place on August 31, 2016.

The disputed technology relates to virtual reality technology. The following terms were considered:

1. “virtual reality computer system”

2. “virtual environment”

Claim terms are construed in erythropoietin case

Amgen Inc. et al. v. Hospira, Inc., C.A. No. 15-839-RGA, November 30, 2016.

Andrews, J.   Claim construction opinion issues regarding two terms from one patent.  A Markman hearing took place on September 21, 2016.

The disputed technology relates to pharmaceutical compositions containing isoforms or mixtures thereof. The following terms were considered:

1. "an isolated ... isoform" ;

2. “isolated . . . isoform”

In addition, claim 8 is found to be invalid in violation of section 112 because it improperly narrows claim 1. Claim 1 requires only one isoform, while claim 8 consists of two or three isoforms.

Claim terms are construed in multicarrier communication systems case

TQ Delta LLC v. Comcast Cable Communications LLC et al., C.A. Nos. 15-611-RGA, 15-612-RGA, 15-613-RGA, 15-614-RGA, 15-615-RGA, 15-616-RGA, November 30, 2016.

Andrews, J.   Claim construction opinion issues regarding twenty terms from six patents.  A Markman hearing took place on October 18, 2016.

The disputed technology relates to multicarrier communication systems. The following terms were considered:

1. "carrier signal" and "carrier""

2. "determin[e/ing] a phase shift for the carrier signal"

3. "phase scrambler"

4. "transceiver" More ›

Summary judgment motions are resolved

Delaware Display Group LLC et al. v. Lenovo Holding Company Inc. et al., C.A. Nos. 13-2108-RGA, 13-2109-RGA, 13-2112-RGA, November 28, 2016.

The court finds that the right to sue for infringement prior to the assignment of the patents was transferred to plaintiffs. Plaintiff’s motion regarding unclean hands is denied. The invalidity motion is denied due to issues of fact. The remaining summary judgment motions regarding infringement are denied due to issues of fact remaining. More ›

Motion to continue trial date is denied

Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC et al. v. Gilead Sciences Inc. et al., C.A. Nos. 13-1987-LPS, 14-109-LPS, 14-846-LPS, November 22, 2016. 

Stark, C. J. Defendants’ motion to continue the trial date is denied. Other pretrial rulings issue.

The possibility that the Federal Circuit may soon decide the validity of the patent-in-suit, or that plaintiff may prevail on appeal and that the trial issues could be combined with issues in a trial on a different patent, are insufficient reasons to justify postponing this trial. Plaintiff’s motion to preclude evidence or argument that plaintiffs characterize as irrelevant is denied. Disputes regarding trial procedures are addresses.

Claims are construed in ANDA case relating to crystalline modifications

Forest Laboratories, LLC et al. v. Accord Healthcare Inc., et al., C.A. No. 15-272-GMS, November 21, 2016.

Stark, J.   Claim construction opinion issues regarding seven terms from four patents.  A Markman hearing took place on October 19, 2016.

The disputed technology relates to new crystalline modifications of hydrochloride molecules often used in the preparation of medicaments for the treatment or prevention of many disorders. More ›

Claims are construed in network communications case

Scientific Telecommunications, LLC v. Adtran, Inc., C.A. No. 15-647-SLR, November 21, 2016.

Robinson, J.   Claim construction opinion issues regarding twenty-nine terms from two patents.  A Markman hearing took place on October 28, 2016.

The disputed technology relates to communications between devices on the virtual local area networks and the router pass through the learning internetwork switch. The court finds that the preambles are not limiting. The following terms were considered:

1. “[A] switch”

2. “[A] router”

3. “Port” More ›

Terms are construed and summary judgment is denied in pharmaceutical case

Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC et al. v. Gilead Sciences Inc. et al., C.A. Nos. 13-1987-LPS, 14-109-LPS, 14-846-LPS, November 16, 2016.

The disputed technology relates to prodrugs used in prevention and treatment of Flaviviridae infections.  The following terms were considered:The disputed technology relates to prodrugs used in prevention and treatment of Flaviviridae infections. The following terms were considered:

  1. 1. “method for [the] treatment of a Hepatitis C virus infection”

    2. “[antivirally] effective amount”

Motion for reconsideration is denied

Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC et al. v. Gilead Sciences Inc. et al., C.A. Nos. 13-1987-LPS, 14-109-LPS, 14-846-LPS, November 16, 2016.

Stark, C. J. Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration of the court’s ruling denying the motion to strike three defenses is denied.

Plaintiffs have failed to show reconsideration is warranted.  There has been no change in controlling law, new evidence, or need to correct an error of law or fact.  Having elected to seek to strike three defenses in and all or nothing choice, the court made that choice and the new focus on one defense does not provide a basis for reconsideration.

Magistrate’s recommendation that the case be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is adopted

Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC et al. v. Gilead Sciences Inc. et al., C.A. Nos. 13-1987-LPS, 14-109-LPS, 14-846-LPS, November 16, 2016.

Stark, C. J. Plaintiff’s objections are overruled and magistrate’s report and recommendations adopted in full.

This case involves a challenge to the result of a PTO interference declared after September 15, 2012.  The magistrate earlier recommended that defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction be granted. Plaintiffs objected, and the court finds it is without jurisdiction to resolve the dispute.  Plaintiff has an appeal pending in the Federal Circuit, and it may also appeal this decision.

Defendant found not to infringe after 2-day bench trial in ANDA case

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., C.A. No. 14-874-SLR, November 16, 2016.

Robinson, J. Judgment in favor of plaintiff as to validity and in favor of defendant as to infringement in ANDA case. A two-day bench trial took place on June 24 and 27, 2016.

The disputed technology relates to a generic mometasone furoate nasal spray. With respect to infringement, the court finds that Merck has not established, by a preponderance of the evidence, the presence of MFM in Teva's ANDA product during its two-year shelf life. More ›

Defendant found to infringe valid patent after buprenorphine trial.

Orexo AB et al v. Actavis Elizabeth LLC, C.A. No. 14-829-SLR, November 15, 2016.

Robinson, J. Findings of fact and conclusions of law following bench trial finding that the asserted claims of one patent are not obvious, the asserted claims of a second patent are obvious, and defendant infringes the valid patent.

The disputed product relates to buprenorphine. With respect the validity of the first patent, the parties dispute whether the prior art discloses sublingual administration.   More ›

Parties’ objections to Judge Burke’s recommended claim constructions are overruled

TriPlay Inc. et al v. WhatsApp Inc., C.A. No. 13-1703-LPS, November 15, 2016.

Stark, C. J. Defendant’s objections to magistrate’s report and recommendation regarding claim construction are overruled and the magistrate’s report is adopted.

Defendant objected to the recommendation that the terms “access block” and “media block” were not indefinite. Plaintiff objected to the recommended construction of the term “providing, by the media block, a clickable icon.” The court concludes that the magistrate correctly construed that term.