Archives: Local Rules

Subscribe to Local Rules RSS Feed

Trading Technologies: New Expert Opinions Doomed by Lack of Inclusion in LPR Final Contentions

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Experts, Local Rules
The Court also struck some, but not all, of the experts’ opinions based upon trader usage. Trading Techs. Int’l, Inc. v. CQG, Inc., No. 05 C 4811, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Sep. 10, 2014) (Coleman, J.). Judge Coleman granted in part and denied in part defendants’ (collectively “CQG”) motion to strike portions of plaintiff Trading Technologies’ … Continue Reading

Stay Pending Inter Partes Review Warranted by Plaintiff’s Delay in Filing Suit

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules
Ignite USA, LLC v. Pacific Market Int’l, LLC, No. 14 C 845, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. May 29, 2014) (Holderman, J.). Judge Holderman granted defendant Pacific Marketing International’s (“PMI’s”) motion to stay plaintiff Ignite USA’s patent litigation case pending the results of PMI’s Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) seeking to invalidate Ignite USA’s asserted patent regarding … Continue Reading

Patent Claims Dismissed for Lack of Ownership

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules
Rehco, LLC v. Spin Master, Ltd., No. 13 C 2245, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Mar. 17, 2014) (Leinenweber, J.). Judge Leinenweber granted defendant Spin Master’s motion to dismiss plaintiff Rehco’s patent infringement claim related to a toy airplane, granted in part Spin Master’s motion to strike and granted Rehco’s motion to strike.  As an initial … Continue Reading

Fine Levied for Failing to Serve Courtesy Copies

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules
Sonic Industry, LLC v. iRobot Corp., No. 13 C 9251, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Jan. 14, 2014) (Shadur, Sen. J.). Judge Shadur sua sponte fined plaintiff Sonic Industry for failure to comply with Local Rule 5.2(f).  Several days after filing its complaint, Sonic Industry still had not provided chambers with a courtesy copy of the … Continue Reading

Court Sua Sponte Orders Production of Evidence and a Hearing on a Copyright Issue

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules, Uncategorized
Flava Works, Inc. v. Momient, No. 11 C 6306, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Apr. 1, 2013) (Shadur, Sen. J.). Judge Shadur, after reading plaintiff FlavaWorks’ answer to defendant’s copyright counterclaims, sua sponte ordered FlavaWorks to produce a copy of the Commission Work Agreement that FlavaWorks alleged assigned all rights in the videos and photographs at … Continue Reading

N.D. Illinois Proposes New Local Patent Rules for Electronically Stored Information

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules
In October along with proposed revisions to the Local Patent Rules, the Northern District proposed new Local Patent Rules for Electronically Stored Information (“LPR ESI”).  The LPR ESI share many commonalities with standing ESI Orders being used in patent cases in districts across the country.  Additionally, the proposed LPR ESI is consistent with the existing … Continue Reading

Court Grants Summary Judgment Based Upon No Likelihood of Confusion

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules, Summary Judgment
Hearthware, Inc. v. E. Mishan & Sons, Inc., No. 11 C 5233, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Aug. 10, 2012) (Nolan, J.). Judge Nolan granted defendant E. Mishan & Sons (“EMS”) motion for summary judgment on plaintiff Hearthware’s copyright, Lanham Act and related state law claims related to EMS’s alleged copying of Hearthware’s Nu Wave halogen … Continue Reading

Customer Suit Exception Stays Claims

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules
Micro Enhanced Tech. Inc. v. Videx, Inc., No. 11 C 5506, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Aug. 16, 2012) (Dow, J.). Judge Dow granted the customer defendants’ motion to sever and stay plaintiff MET’s claims against them based upon the customer suit exception in this patent infringement case involving MET’s Cyberlock technology.  MET’s claims against Verizon … Continue Reading

Fees Awarded for “Egregious” Disqualification Motion

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules
OpticsPlanet, Inc. v. Opticsale, Inc., No. 09 C 7934, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Oct. 22, 2012) (Shadur, Sen. J.). Judge Shadur granted plaintiff OpticsPlanet’s motion for sanctions based upon defendants’ failed attempt to disqualify OpticsPlanet’s individual counsel and its law firm.  The Court noted that the attempted disqualification was “particularly egregious,” but awarded only fees, … Continue Reading

Copyright Act Preempts Misappropriation Claim

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules
Morningware, Inc. v. Hearthware Home Prods., Inc., No. 09 C 4348, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Sep. 4, 2012) (St. Eve, J.). Judge St. Eve granted in part plaintiff Morningware’s motion for summary judgment as to defendant Hearthware’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Lanham Act and related state law counterclaims.  As an initial matter, the parties’ Local … Continue Reading

Local Rule 56.1 Failures Result in Disputed Facts

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules
Morningware, Inc. v. Hearthware Home Prods., Inc., No. 09 C 4348, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Aug. 27, 2012) (St. Eve, J.). Judge St. Eve denied plaintiff Morningware’s and defendant Hearthware’s cross-motion for summary judgment regarding Morningware’s Lanham Act, Deceptive Trade Practices Act and related state law claims in this Lanham Act and patent infringement case.  … Continue Reading

Court Grants Time-Limited Reexam Stay

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules
Cascades Computer Innovations, LLC v. SK hynix, Inc., No. 11 C 4356, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. May 25, 2012) (Lefkow, J.). Judge Lefkow granted a sixteen month stay of this patent case pending defendants’ inter partes reexamination of the patent in suit.  The Court originally denied an unbounded stay.  But the Court held that a … Continue Reading

Patent Protective Order Will Not be Amended Absent Showing of Specific Reasons

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules
AmTab Mfg. Corp. v. SICO, Inc., No. 11 C 2692, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. June 19, 2012) (Darrah, J.). Judge Darrah denied defendants’ (collectively “SICO”) request to modify the Local Patent Rules standard protective order to include a prosecution bar.  While a prosecution bar could be appropriate, SICO failed to provide the specific facts necessary … Continue Reading

Default Judgment Requires Damages Prove-Up

By R. David Donoghue on Posted in Local Rules
Brown-Younger v. Lulu.com, No. 12 C 1979, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. June 15, 2012) (Shadur, Sen. J.). Judge Shadur acknowledged that pro se plaintiff’s motion for default was timely in this copyright infringement case.  Defendant Barnes & Noble’s deadline to answer or otherwise plead had passed, but plaintiff had not provided a prove-up of damages.  … Continue Reading
LexBlog