Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[petethebody]

So we've talked about the companies that have been sued. 

Now can anyone name any lawsuits (with citation) where the plaintiff has won?

I know of only one: Custom Designs of Nashville, Inc. v. ALSA Corp., 3-08-cv-00665 (M.D. Tenn. July 7, 2008). But there, the defendant claimed patent pending where there was no patent pending. 

[bleedingpen]

So we've talked about the companies that have been sued. 

Now can anyone name any lawsuits (with citation) where the plaintiff has won?

I know of only one: Custom Designs of Nashville, Inc. v. ALSA Corp., 3-08-cv-00665 (M.D. Tenn. July 7, 2008). But there, the defendant claimed patent pending where there was no patent pending. 

Bon Tool case.

[petethebody]

Bon Tool case.

Forgot about that one.  The facts there were pretty sensational: licensee stopped purchasing goods from patentee, bought very similar goods for resale and labeled them with patentee's patent number, filed dj action alleging non-infringement, continued marking after victory on non-infringement.

"The district court found that Forest had the requisite knowledge that its S2 stilt was not covered by the '515 patent after a district court in a related case granted summary judgment of noninfringement. In 2001, Forest had accused Warner Manufacturing Company (Warner) of selling stilts that infringed the '515 patent. In 2003, Warner asserted that its stilts did not infringe because they did not include a “resiliently lined yoke.” Warner filed a declaratory judgment action in 2005 in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota seeking a judgment of noninfringement. On March 30, 2007, the district court construed the term “resiliently lined yoke” in a manner nearly identical to the construction in the present case. On November 15, 2007, the district court granted summary judgment of noninfringement in favor of Warner because Warner's stilts did not have a resiliently lined yoke as defined by the court."

Let's refine the question more: does anyone know of any district court cases where relator has won a false marking claim where the false mark was a once-applicable, but expired patent?