Bio-Rad Labs. v. 10X Genomics was decided on August 3, 2020, on appeal from the District of Delaware. The jury found that Plaintiff Bio-Rad’s three asserted patents were valid and willfully infringed, and “awarded damages in the amount of $23,930,716.” Post-trial, the district court denied Defendant 10X’s motion for JMOL, …
LEGO v. ZURU is a nonprecedential case decided on January 15, 2020, on appeal from the District of Connecticut. Plaintiff LEGO filed a complaint against defendant ZURU for copyright, trademark, and patent infringement and obtained a temporary restraining order. After a hearing, the court granted LEGO’s motion for a preliminary …
Endo v. Teva is a nonprecedential case decided on May 16, 2018 on appeal from the Southern District of New York. The district court found all asserted claims by plaintiff Endo against defendant Teva not invalid, and found all but two asserted claims infringed. The district court then issued a permanent injunction against …
MACOM Tech. v. Infineon was decided on January 29, 2018 on appeal from the Central District of California. The parties entered into an agreement that allowed plaintiff MACOM and defendant Infineon to share rights to practice licensed patents within a general “Field of Use.” The agreement further defined an “Exclusive Field” …
Mylan v. Aurobindo was decided on May 19, 2017 on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. There, the district court granted co-Plaintiff Mylan’s motion for a preliminary injunction as to the compound and process patents, finding that Defendant Aurobindo likely infringed the patents under the doctrine of equivalents, and that Arubindo …
Metalcraft of Mayville v. Toro was decided on February 16, 2017 on appeal from the Eastern District of Wisconsin. The patent relates to a system for ride-on lawnmowers. The district court granted plaintiff Metalcraft a preliminary injunction enjoining defendant Toro from making, using, selling, and offering to sell lawnmowers equipped with …
Tinnus v. Telebrands was decided on January 24, 2017 on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. There, the district court granted plaintiff Tinnus a preliminary injunction, affirming a Magistrage Judge’s finding that the claims were likely infringed, were not vulnerable on indefiniteness or obviousness grounds, and that Tinnus made a showing …
United Construction v. Tile Tech was decided on December 15, 2016 on appeal from the Central District of California. The patent concerned a support pedestal adapted to support surface tiles to form an elevated building surface. After “a series of delays, missed deadlines, and other procedural missteps by [defendant] Tile Tech,” …
This opinion was superseded. Asetek Danmark v. CMI USA was decided on December 6, 2016 on appeal from the Northern District of California. Plaintiff Asetek prevailed at trial, receiving a judgment of infringement and of no invalidity, plus a damages award against defendant CMI of $404,941 on a 14.5% royalty rate. The district …
Edge v. Aguila was a nonprecedential case decided on December 21, 2015 on appeal from the Southern District of Florida. There, plaintiff-Edge sued Defendant-Aguila for patent, trademark, and trade dress infringement. After the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation, the district court granted Edge’s motion for preliminary injunction. Aguila appealed. The Federal Circuit affirmed the preliminary injunction …