Tag: summary judgment

Special Master Recommends Denying ThermoLife International LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Deeming ThermoLife’s Arguments “Inappropriate” and Noting Issues of Material Fact as to the Asserted Patents’ Validity Under Sections 102 and 103

ThermoLife International, LLC v. Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 1:15-cv-00892-ELR (N.D. Ga. July 28, 2022): On July 28, 2022, Special Master Anthony B. Askew recommended the denial of Plaintiff ThermoLife International LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment of No Invalidity Under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 or […]

Court Recognizes Alice Decision Potentially Impacts Case by Allowing Late Motion for Judgment on Pleadings

Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC (“Mobile”)[background on company], initiated a patent infringement case against United Parcel Service, Inc. (“UPS”), in 2012 on U.S. Patent No. 5,786,748 on a method and apparatus for giving notification of express mail delivery. UPS filed a Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt. 95], which was […]

Order Pierces Allegations Unsupported By Receivable Evidence In Granting Summary Judgment To All Parties In IP Dispute

This blog post is authored by Kirk Watkins and posted by the Womble Carlyle Team.In 2011 EarthCam, Inc. (“EarthCam”) brought suit against Richard Hermann (“Hermann”), OxBlue Corporation, Chandler McCormarck, John Paulson, and Brian Mattern (collectively “OxBlue”) asserting corporate espionage to misappropriate trade secrets.  OxBlue filed counterclaims for copyright […]

Case Filed in 2006 Deemed to be in "Early Stages" and Stayed for Second Time Pending PTO Review

IP Co., LLC’s (“IPCO”) patent infringement suit against Tropos Networks, Inc. (“Tropos”) has a long and tortured, albeit uncomplicated, history. IPCO filed its complaint back in March 2006, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,249,516 (“the ‘516 patent”) and 6,044,062 (“the ‘062 patent”).  Tropos soon thereafter filed ex […]

Jury Left To Decide If Camouflage Patterns Have Specific Protectable Elements

Judge Land denied the summary judgment motion of Digital Concealment Systems, LLC (“Digital”), filed that its “A-TACS FG Camo” pattern does not infringe copyrights belonging to HyperStealth Biotechnology Corp. (“HyperStealth”).[1] In reaching the ruling, the Court did not consider the opinions of HyperStealth’s expert.  Therefore, Digital’s motion to exclude […]

Counterfeit Merchandise Sales Result in Summary Judgment of Infringement, but Not of “Trademark Counterfeiting”; Middle District of GA Clarifies Statutory Damages Standards

Introduction As puzzling as it may first seem, a seller of merchandise bearing counterfeit trademarks might not be found liable for “trademark counterfeiting.”  Selling such merchandise does not establish counterfeiting liability without a showing of intent.  Nevertheless, a defendant’s use of a counterfeit mark, regardless of intent, allows […]

Wall Street Journal Law Blog Praises Middle District of Georgia Judge for His Common Sense

The July 12, 2012 debut of this blog happened to cover a decision by U.S. District Judge Clay D. Land, of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, resolving a patent case preliminary injunction motion.  Subsequent entries covered decisions by other Middle District judges in other intellectual property (“IP”) matters […]

11th Circuit Affirms District Court Ruling in Favor of Defendants in Stormwater Filtration "Baffle Boxes" Trademark Case

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has issued its ruling in a trademark dispute between two competing manufacturers of baffle boxes — stormwater filtration devices that “remove debris, trash, oil and other pollutants from stormwater before the stormwater reaches lakes, rivers, and streams.”[1]  The Court […]