Cases

MOORE, Circuit Judge. Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. and BRP U.S. Inc. (collectively, “BRP”) appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida’s denial of judgment as a matter of law that the asserted claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,568,969 (“’969 patent”) and 6,793,-545 (“’545 patent”) would have been

BETH BLOOM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Defendants Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc. and BRP U.S. Inc.'s (together, "BRP") Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum of Law, ECF No. [307] ("BRP's Motion"), filed on June 1, 2018 and Plaintiff Arctic Cat, Inc.'s ("Arctic Cat") Sealed Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. [310] ("Arctic Cat's Motion"), also filed on June 1, 2018

362 F.Supp.2d 1113 (2005) ARCTIC CAT, INC., a Minnesota Corporation, Plaintiff, v. INJECTION RESEARCH SPECIALISTS, INC., a Colorado corporation, and Pacer Industries, Inc., a Missouri corporation, Defendants. INJECTION RESEARCH SPECIALISTS, INC., a Colorado corporation, and Pacer Industries, Inc., a Missouri corporation, Counterclaimants, v. ARCTIC CAT, INC., a Minnesota Corporation, and Suzuki Motor Corporation, a Japanese Corporatio

701 F.Supp.2d 1197 (2010) CYCLE BARN, INC., a Washington corporation, d/b/a Smokey Point Cycle Barn, Plaintiff, v. ARCTIC CAT SALES INC., a Minnesota corporation, Defendant. Case No. C10-0035 MJP. United States District Court, W.D. Washington, at Seattle. March 24, 2010. *1200 William Mitchell Cogdill, Jr., Patrick Vail, Cogdill

ORDER ERICKSON, United States Magistrate Judge. I. Introduction On August 1, 2002, the Court heard argument on the Motion of the Defendants Injection Research Specialists, Inc., and Pacer Industries, Inc. (collectively, “IRS”), Motion to Compel, and for an award of sanctions. At the time of the Hearing, the Plaintiff Arctic Cat, Inc. (“Arctic Cat”), appeared by J. Derek Vanden

666 N.W.2d 320 (2003) MOTORSPORTS RACING PLUS, INC., Petitioner, Appellant, v. ARCTIC CAT SALES, INC., Respondent, Polaris Sales, Inc., Respondent, Bombardier Motor Corporation of America, a Delaware corporation, Respondent, Yamaha Motor Corporation, a California corporation, Respondent, International Snowmobile Racing, a Wisconsin corporation, Respondent, International Snowmobile Manufacturers Association, a Michigan corporat

Williams v State of New York (2020 NY Slip Op 05334) Williams v State of New York 2020 NY Slip Op 05334 Decided on October 2, 2020 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau p

Case: 22-1258 Document: 70 Page: 1 Filed: 04/01/2024 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICA NV, Plaintiffs-Appellees v. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., MYLAN LABORATORIES LTD., Defendants-Appellants ______________________ 2022-1258, 2022-1307

Case: 20-1685 Document: 48 Page: 1 Filed: 09/28/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ SRI INTERNATIONAL, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-Cross-Appellant ______________________ 2020-1685, 2020-1704 _____________________

William Alsup, United States District Judge INTRODUCTION In this patent infringement action, each side moves for summary judgment on one asserted claim. For the reasons stated below, the patent owner's motion for summary judgment of infringement is DENIED . The accused infringer's motion for summary judgment of non-infringement and on damages is GRANTED to the exten

Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge Lourie. Stoll, Circuit Judge. *1372This is an appeal from a final judgment in a patent case. Cisco Systems, Inc. ("Cisco") appeals the district court's (1) denial of Cisco's motion for summary judgment of patent ineligibility under § 101, (2) construction of the claim term "network t

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ SRI INTERNATIONAL, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-Appellant ______________________ 2017-2223 ______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in No. 1:13-cv-0153

Leonard T. Strand, Chief Judge I. INTRODUCTION This patent case is before me on: (1) a motion (Doc. No. 90) for summary judgment on invalidity filed by defendant C & B Manufacturing, Inc. (HitchDoc), (2) a motion (Doc. No. 92) for summary judgment as to HitchDoc's affirmative defenses, filed by plaintiff Meridian Manufacturing Inc. (Meridian) and (3) a motion (Doc. No. 88) for summary j

Case: 19-1787 Document: 64 Page: 1 Filed: 06/25/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ ADIDAS AG, Appellant v. NIKE, INC., Appellee ______________________ 2019-1787, 2019-1788 ______________________ Appeals from the United States Patent

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ELENA A. BELOV, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 21-1529 (JEB) WORLD WILDLIFE FUND, INC., Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Elena A. Belov worked for Defendant World Wildlife Fund, Inc. from 2012 until 2020, when WWF declined to renew her limited-term em

Moore, Circuit Judge. ORDER In light of the Supreme Court's recent decision in SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 1348 ,

Case: 19-2041 Document: 56 Page: 1 Filed: 07/14/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ PACKET INTELLIGENCE LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee v. NETSCOUT SYSTEMS, INC., NETSCOUT SYSTEMS TEXAS, LLC, FKA TEKTRONIX TEXAS, LLC DBA TEKTRONIX COMMUNICATIONS, Defendants-Appellants ______________________ 2019-2

Case: 19-2411 Document: 83 Page: 1 Filed: 01/05/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ SIMO HOLDINGS INC., Plaintiff-Appellee v. HONG KONG UCLOUDLINK NETWORK TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, UCLOUDLINK (AMERICA), LTD., Defendants-Appellants ______________________ 2019-2411

Lourie, Circuit Judge. *1368 Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. ("Mylan"), Breckenridge Pharmaceutical, Inc. ("Breckenridge"), and Alembic Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. ("Alembic") (collectively, "Appellants") appeal from the final written decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial a

J. P. Stadtmueller, U.S. District Court This is a patent case about lithium-ion batteries used in power tools. The case was tried to a jury in October 2017. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of Plaintiffs and awarded nearly $28 million in damages. Before the Court are the parties' post-trial motions. For the reasons stated below, the Court will deny post-trial relief to Defendant Snap-On Incorporated ("Snap-On"), deny Plaintiffs' motion f