Khan v. Hemosphere is a nonprecendential case decided on August 13, 2020, on appeal from the Northern District of Illinois. Pro se plaintiffs Khans “alleged that the defendant corporations, hospitals, and physicians directly and indirectly infringed” their patent. The Khans sued “three hundred defendants.” The district court dismissed without prejudice …
Electronic Communication Technologies v. ShoppersChoice.com was decided on July 1, 2020, on appeal from the Southern District of Florida. The district court granted Defendant ShoppersChoice’s motion for judgment on the pleadings invalidating independent claim 11 of Plaintiff ECT’s asserted patent. The Federal Circuit affirmed. Subsequently, the district court denied ShopperChoice’s …
Munchkin v. Luv N’ Care was decided on June 8, 2020, on appeal from the Central District of California. Plaintiff Munchkin sued Defendant Luv N’ Care for unfair competition, trademark infringement, trade dress infringement, and patent infringement. Subsequently, Luv N’ Care filed an IPR petition at the PTAB, which was …
Eko Brands v. Adrian Rivera Maynez was decided on January 13, 2020, on appeal from the Western District of Washington. Plaintiff Eko filed a declaratory judgment and an infringement action against defendant ARM. On summary judgment, the district court granted Eko declaratory judgment of noninfringement but denied the motion as …
Intellectual Ventures I v. Trend Micro was decided on December 19, 2019 on appeal from the District of Delaware. In a related trial by plaintiff Intellectual Ventures against another defendant on the same patents, the jury found infringement of some claims and noninfringement of others. During that trial Intellectual Ventures’ …
Blackbird v. Health In Motion was decided on December 16, 2019 on appeal from the Central District of California. “[S]hortly before discovery was scheduled to end,” defendant Health In Motion filed a motion for summary judgment. After the motion was fully briefed, without notice to Health, plaintiff Blackbird filed a …
Section 285 of the Patent Act provides that a district “court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.” The Supreme Court in Octane Fitness v. Icon Health held that an exceptional case “is simply one that stands out from others with respect to the substantive …
ATEN International v. Uniclass was decided on August 6, 2019 on appeal from the Central District of California. The district court granted defendant Uniclass summary judgment on plaintiff ATEN’s lost profits theory of damages. So ATEN “proceeded to trial based on a reasonable royalty theory of damages, under which its …
CellSpin Soft v. Fitbit was decided on June 25, 2019 on appeal from the Northern District of California. Plaintiff CellSpin filed more than a dozen cases alleging infringement of certain patents. On a motion to dismiss, the district court found that none of the asserted claims were patent eligible. The district court found the …
ThermoLife v. GNC was decided on May 1, 2019 on appeal from the Southern District of California. Plaintiff ThermoLife brought suit against Defendant GNC, and other defendants, for patent infringement. This was one of 81 infringement lawsuits the exclusive licensee filed. The patents relate to “methods and compositions involving the amino …