Chicago IP Litigation

Subscribe
Visit Blog
By: R. David Donoghue

Blog Authors

R. David Donoghue

Latest from Chicago IP Litigation

Chief Judge Pallmeyer issued her seventh amended COVID General Order earlier today, October 29, 2020. As with the last order, there are no additional blanket case extensions. The General Order basically extends provisions limiting courthouse access to what is necessary. But it also suspends jury trials — both civil and criminal — from November 9, 2020 through January 26, 2021. Bench trials are allowed, but no jury trials will be held in the Northern District until late January, at the earliest. Specifically, the General Order also requires: No Local Rule 5.2(f) Courtesy Copies — Absent case-specific requests, Local Rule 5.2(f)…
ABC Corp. I v. Partnership & Unincorporated Assocs. Identified on Sched. A, No. 1:20 cv 4806, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Sept. 4, 2020) (Seeger, J.). Having previously issued a show cause order, Judge Seeger granted plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint in this patent dispute naming the plaintiff, or the case would be dismissed for improperly filing as an anonymous plaintiff. While Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 10(a) allows a plaintiff to file anonymously in exceptional circumstances and with leave of court, those circumstances include protecting state secrets, trade secrets or victims of abuse, not patent infringement. Plaintiff’s theory “seemed…
Chief Judge Pallmeyer opted for an abbreviated format for her sixth amended COVID General Order issued, Friday, September 4. That is presumably because the order is simpler than it was at the outset of the pandemic. There are no blanket case extension. The General Order basically extends provisions limiting courthouse access to wha tis necessary. Specifically, the General Order requires: No Local Rule 5.2(f) Courtesy Copies — Absent case-specific requests, Local Rule 5.2(f) requiring paper courtesy copies of many filings is suspended. In fact, “[n]o courtesy copies may be submitted . . . unless the parties receive case-specific requests for…
The UIC John Marshall Law School’s Center for Intellectual Property, Information & Privacy is hosting a virtual seminar along with the Institute for Intellectual Property & Social Justice on Friday, September 11, 2020 from 7:40am – 3:00pm CT focused on IP issues in the midst of the pandemic. The speaker list is impressive, headlined by the Federal Circuit’s Judge Linn and Judge Michel (Ret.). The conference promises to be unique and thought provoking. You can register here.…
Judges Wood & Pallmeyer issued a joint order requiring that everyone in public spaces of the Northern District and Seventh Circuit wear face masks or coverings. The order includes all public spaces including the lobby, elevators, restrooms, public corridors and also courtrooms, absent direction otherwise from the presiding judge. The mask must cover both the nose and the mouth. The only exception to this order is for people with documentation stating that they are unable to wear a mask or face covering for medical reasons.…
Yesterday, Tuesday, May 26, Chief Judge Pallmeyer entered a Fourth Amended General Order updating the first three (which extended all civil deadlines 28 days, an additional 21 days and 28 more days, for 77 total days) and further addressing the “Coronavirus COVID-19 public Emergency.” The fourth amended order did not grant any additional blanket extensions. The Court did suspend jury trials until after August 3, 2020. And, absent contrary directions from a specific judge, suspended courtesy copy requirements through July 15, 2020. Judges are free to hold hearings, bench trials and settlement conferences, although they should only be in-person…
On Friday, April 24, Chief Judge Pallmeyer entered a Third Amended General Order updating the first two (which extended all civil deadlines 21 days and than an additional 28 days, respectively) and further addressing the “Coronavirus COVID-19 public Emergency.” Beyond setting out the further extension and addressing hearings, settlement conferences and trials, the biggest change in the third general order is the paragraph 5 requirement that for any case in which no docket entry or order has been posted by the assigned judge since March 16 (unless the assigned judge’s webpage instructs otherwise), the parties file a joint written…
Everite Transworld Ltd. v. MIEH, Inc., No. 19 C 678, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Feb. 24, 2020) (Rowland, J.) Judge Rowland granted in part plaintiffs’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss defendant MIEH’s counterclaims for tortious interference and civil conspiracy in this patent dispute involving toy vehicles that travel through tubes. MIEH did not meet its Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) heightened pleading requirement for its civil conspiracy claim. First, the Court disregarded statements that MIEH did not allege to be false. And the remaining statements, even if they were false, were made after the parties executed the…
Neurografix v. Brainlab, Inc., No. 12 C 6075, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Jan. 30, 2020) (Kennelly, J.) Judge Kennelly granted defendants’ (collectively “Brainlab”) Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 motion for summary judgment of no lost profits in this patent case involving tractographies. Plaintiff Neurografix was not entitled to lost profits because it had not made its own product and  it could not prove that it had the manufacturing and marketing capabilities to exploit the demand for Brainlab’s product. Neurografix did offer some evidence of plans to offer a competing service, but the plans were no more than speculative. For example,…
FameFlynet, Inc. v. Jasmine Enters. Inc., No. 17 C 4749, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Aug. 8, 2019) (Durkin, J.) Judge Durkin granted plaintiff FameFlynet’s motions for attorney’s fees as the prevailing party in this copyright dispute involving celebrity wedding photos, and granted in part defendant Jasmine’s motion to strike FameFlynet’s motion. Upon learning of FameFlynet’s allegations that Jasmine breached FameFlynet’s copyrights by posting FameFlynet’s images online, Jasmine took down the images. Additionally, at the outset of the case, the parties came to within $1,000 of settling, with FameFlynet demanding $16,000 and Jasmine countering at $15,000. Despite that, the case proceeded…
On Thursday, April 23, 2020 from 12:00 – 1:15pm CT, the Federal Bar Association is hosting a virtual CLE with three of the Northern District’s newest district judges: Martha M. Pacold Mary M. Rowland Steven C. Seeger The panel will be moderated by retired Chief Judge Ruben Castillo. In addition to comments on written and oral advocacy, the program promises question and answer sessions with the judges. Click here to register.  …
Black & Decker Inc. v. Positec USA Inc., No. 13 C 3075, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Feb. 20, 2020) (Gottschall, J.) Judge Gottschall denied defendants’ (collectively “Positec”) Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 motion for summary judgment of invalidity and granted it as to noninfringement in this patent case involving string trimmers, commonly known as weed-whackers. The Court did not rely upon plaintiff Black & Decker’s expert opinion regarding infringement because it solely provided conclusions without explanation or detail. The Court also refused to reconsider the meaning of “planar” in the claims. But Positec’s invalidity expert opinion was sufficient to create…
This afternoon, Chief Judge Pallmeyer entered a second general order updating the first general order (which extended all civil deadlines 21 days) and further addressing the “Coronavirus COVID-19 public Emergency” The Court ordered as follows: For all civil cases, all case deadlines whether set by the Federal Rules, Local Rules, Court order or Executive Committee order are extended by 28 days. For deadlines set before the first Order, deadlines have been moved a total of 49 days. Deadlines set between the two orders are only moved 28 days. The Order notes that the Court is accessible by ECF and, in…
Hangzhou Aoshuang E-Comm. Co. v. 008Fashion, et al., No. 19 C 4565, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Dec. 3, 2019) (Cole, Mag. J.). Magistrate Judge Cole granted defendants’ (collectively “008Fashion”) motion for an extension to respond to discovery requests and to vacate the Court’s prior order finding that 008Fashion’s responses were late and requiring compliance with Local Rule 37.2. 008Fashion’s motion for extension was filed five minutes before its Court-ordered deadline to respond to the discovery and was noticed for hearing after the deadline, in fact, after 008Fashion’s proposed extended deadline. This was improper. Furthermore, the responses were “extremely late.” The…
Beckman Coulter, Inc. v. Sysmex Am., Inc., No. 18 C 6563, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Feb. 26, 2020) (Lee, J.). Judge Lee denied plaintiff Beckman Coulter (“BCI”) Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d) motion for additional discovery in this patent dispute involving automated laboratory software. Defendants (collectively “Sysmex”) sought summary judgment precluding recovery of pre-suit damages. Sysmex argued that notice – actual or constructive – was required for pre-suit damages because BCI sold product embodying the claims. BCI sought additional discovery arguing that to the extent that Sysmex later argued the BCI products did not embody the claims, there would be…