Intellect Wireless, Inc. v. HTC Corp., No. 09 C 2945, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Mar. 2, 2012) (Hart, Sen. J.).
Judge Hart denied defendant’s (collectively “HTC”) motion for summary judgment of inequitable conduct based upon the submission to the Patent Office of allegedly false and misleading declarations. The Court held that there were disputed questions of fact preventing summary judgment, without elaborating upon what facts were disputed. And based upon the parties’ papers, the Court reversed the inequitable conduct claims for an early bench trial.
The Court then ordered that, within four weeks, the parties file:
- Statements of undisputed facts;
- Proposed conclusions of law;
- Exhibit lists; and
- Witness lists.
This appears to be another example in the growing trend of Northern District judges looking for ways, like mini-Markmans and early Rule 30(b)(6) depositions, to streamline patent cases.