Tracking Northern District of Illinois IP Cases
TWD, LLC v. Grunt Style LLC, No. 18 C 7695, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Oct. 23, 2019) (Kocoras, J.).
Judge Kocoras granted in part defendant-counterclaimant Grunt Style’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings and granted Grunt Style’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) motion to strike plaintiff-counterdefendant TWD’s affirmative defenses…
Pressure Specialist, Inc. v. Next Gen Mfg., Inc., No. 17 C 6582, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Jan. 24, 2018) (St. Eve, J.).
Judge St. Eve denied defendant’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss plaintiff’s patent claims related to a gas regulator for paintball guns.
Defendant argued that the claims should be dismissed …
Atlas IP, LLC v. City of Naperville, No. 15 C 10744, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Jul. 19, 2016) (Coleman, J.).
Judge Coleman granted defendant Naperville’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to Twombly / Iqbal in this patent case involving networked power meters.
Although Atlas’s…
At the start of the new year, many of us are spending time looking back at where we have come from and forward to where we want to go. As part of that process, many are making resolutions to make 2015 better than ever. In that spirit, over the next several weeks, I am reposting …
Sonic Indus., LLC v. iRobot Corp. No. 13 C 9251, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Feb. 28, 2014) (Shadur, Sen. J.).
Judge Shadur sua sponte struck portions of defendant iRobot’s answer and affirmative defenses, and allowed other portions to be repled. Of particular note:
…
Trading Techs. Int’l., v. CQG, No. 05 C 4811, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Oct. 31, 2012) (Coleman, J.).
Judge Coleman granted in part plaintiff Trading Technologies’ (“TT”) Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss defendant CQG’s affirmative defenses and declaratory judgment counterclaim. The Court dismissed CQG’s bare-bones defenses which stated in their entirety:…
Gharb v. Mitsubishi Elec. Automation, Inc., No. 10 C 7204, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. June 4, 2012) (Chang, J.).
Judge Chang granted defendant Mitsubishi Electric Automation’s (“Mitsubishi”) Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss plaintiff’s patent complaint. With respect to direct infringement, plaintiff only accused Mitsubishi’s programmable logic controller (“PLC”), but in a …
Addiction & Detoxification Institute, LLC v. Epperly, No. 11 C 5947, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. May 23, 2012) (Dow, J.).
Judge Dow granted defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss plaintiff’s patent infringement suit without prejudice to refile within twenty one days. Plaintiff’s complaint was “woefully deficient” asserting only that defendants “practiced …
Cascades Computer Innovations, LLC v. Sony-Ericsson Mobile Comms. (USA) Inc., No. 11 C 7223, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Apr. 18, 2012) (Darrah, J.).
Judge Darrah denied defendant’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss in this patent case involving simplifying the process by which computer software deals with errors or exceptions. Defendant agreed …
Trading Techs. Int’l., Inc. v. BCG Partners, Inc., No. 10 C 715, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. May 5, 2011) (Kendall, J.).
Judge Kendall granted the FuturePath defendants’ and denied the SunGuard defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss plaintiff Trading Technologies’ (“TT”) patent claims regarding trading software.
FuturePath: The Court dismissed TT’s direct infringement claims against FuturePath because TT did not accuse a specific FuturePath product or even category of product. TT’s reference to unspecified “products” did not meet the Twomby or Iqbal standards, nor did it meet the Federal Circuit’s requirements in McZel v. Spring Nextel Corp., 501 F. 3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Identification of an accused product in TT’s briefing and reference to FuturePath’s website in TT’s indirect infringement claims were insufficient.
TT did not allege that FuturePath had knowledge of TT’s patents. Without an allegation of knowledge, TT’s claims were deficient. The Court, therefore, dismissed all of TT’s claims against FuturePath with leave to replead correcting the deficiencies.
SunGuard: TT alleged that SunGuard had constructive knowledge of TT’s patents, but not actual knowledge. Constructive knowledge was sufficient to maintain TT’s claims, regardless of whether the Federal Circuit might later hold constructive knowledge insufficient.
…
Continue Reading Patent Complaint Must Identify Accused Product at Least Generally
