Recent patent/copyright infringement cases filed in U.S. District Courts

Marilyn Tennissen Dec. 13, 2007, 12:00am

Marshall Division, Eastern District of Texas

Dec. 5

  • Weatherford International Inc. et al vs. TESCO Corp.

    Two Houston-based companies are in a legal dispute regarding 10 patents relating to the drilling and servicing of oil and gas wells.

    Weatherford International Inc. and Weatherford/Lamb Inc. claims to own the rights to the patents including U.S. Patent No. 7,281,587 for Apparatus and Methods for Tubular Makeup Interlock issued Oct. 16, 2007.

    Technology covered in the patents is embodied in tubular handling systems and casing drilling services. Weatherford claims it is the owner and possessor of all rights, titles and interest pertaining to the patents-in-suit.

    Weatherford alleges that TESCO has manufactured, used and sold tubular handling systems and casing drilling services that infringe one or more of the patents, including at least its Casing Drive System. The plaintiff also alleges that TESCO's infringement is willful and deliberate.

    "As a result of the infringing acts described herein, Weatherford has sustained damages and will continue to sustain damages in the future, including irreparable harm, unless defendant TESCO is enjoined from infringing these patents," the original complaint states.

    Plaintiff is seeking a permanent injunction against TESCO, damages adequate to compensate for the infringement to be proven at trial, treble damages, interest, costs, fees and other relief deemed just and equitable.

    Otis Carroll of Ireland, Carroll & Kelley PC in Tyler; Paul Krieger of Fulbright & Jaworski LLP in Houston; and Franklin Jones Jr. of Jones & Jones PC in Marshall are representing the plaintiff.

    The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge T. John Ward and referred to Magistrate Charles Everingham.

    Case No. 2:07-cv-531-TJW-CE

    Dec. 7

  • Dogleg Right Partners LP et al vs. TaylorMade Golf Co. Inc.

    Dogleg Right Partners LP and Dogleg Right Corp. allege that TaylorMade Golf Co. infringes U.S. Patent Nos. 7,189,169 and 7,004,852 by making, using and selling golf clubs and golf club components.

    Dogleg Right is a Plano-based company that claims to have the rights to a customizable center-of-gravity golf club head. The plaintiff alleges that TaylorMade makes and sells golf club products that are covered by the patents.

    "Accordingly, TaylorMade's infringement of the patents has been and continues to be willful and deliberate," the plaintiff's original complaint states.

    Dogleg Right claims that TaylorMade has caused substantial damage and irreparable injury by virtue of its past and continuing infringement, and will continue unless enjoined by the court.

    The plaintiff is seeking a permanent injunction against TaylorMade, damages no less than a reasonable royalty, treble damages, interest, fees, costs and other relief to which plaintiff may be entitled.

    Alan S. Loewinsohn of Loewensohn Flegle Deary LLP in Dallas is lead counsel for the plaintiff.

    The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge T. John Ward and referred to Magistrate Charles Everingham.

    Case No. 2:07-cv-533-TJW-CE

  • Tessara Inc. vs. A-DATA Technology Co. Ltd. et al

    In its original complaint, plaintiff Tessara says it is a global leader in the development of semiconductor packaging technology.

    "Tessara's technology allows companies around the world to meet the growing demand for smaller, faster and more reliable electronic products, including cutting-edge medical devices and critical military defense components," the complaint states. "The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has awarded Tessara several hundred patents that reflect its innovation and protect the company's investment in technology it has developed."

    Tessara acknowledges that dozens of semiconductor manufacturers and packaging companies such as Intel, Texas Instruments, Sony, Toshiba, Hitachi, Matsushita, Sanyo, Samsung, Micron and Infineon have taken licenses to Tessara's patented technology.

    "Regrettably, unlike many licensed companies that have behaved responsibly and respected Tessera's U.S. patents, defendants have chosen to disregard Tessera's rights," the petition states.

    The petition names A-DATA, Acer, Centon, Elpida, International Products Sourcing Group, Kingston Technology, Nanya, Powerchip Semiconductor, ProMOS, Ramexel and other companies as defendants.

    The patents at issue in the suit are U.S. Patent Nos. 5,679,977; 6,133,627; 5,663,106; and 6,458,681. The patents deal with semiconductor chip packages and semiconductor assemblies.

    "Defendants are now and have been infringing � among other things making, using, offering to sell or importing without authority � packaged semiconductor components and assemblies," the suit states.

    The suit refers to infringing products including semiconductor chips having ball grid array packages.

    Plaintiff is seeking an injunction, damages, interest, costs, treble damages, fees and other relief.

    Mark N. Reiter of Dallas is lead attorney for the plaintiff.

    The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge T. John Ward.

    Case No. 2:07-cv-534-TJW

    Tyler Division, Eastern District of Texas

    Dec. 5

  • Typhoon Touch Technologies Inc. et al vs. Motion Computing et al

    Plaintiffs Typhoon Touch Technologies of Nevada and Nova Mobility Systems Inc. of Arizona have filed a patent infringement suit against Texas companies Motion Computing and Dell Inc.

    The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent Nos. 5,379,057 and 5,675,362 for a Portable Computer with Touch Screen and Computing System Employing Same. Nova Mobility claims to be the exclusive licensee of the patents.

    Nova Mobility is a provider of tablet PCs and handheld computer systems that provide data collection technology for health and medical, retail, field service, fleet management and building inspection industries, among others.

    Plaintiffs allege that the Motion Computing LE1700 Tablet PC and other products infringe on the patents-in-suit.

    "As a direct and proximate result of defendants' acts of infringement of the patents-in-suit, plaintiffs have suffered injury and damages for which they are entitled to relief, including but not limited to, monetary recovery of lost profits on defendants' infringing sales and, in any event, no less than a reasonable royalty to compensate for defendants' infringement," the plaintiffs' original complaint states.

    In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants "have knowingly, willfully and deliberately infringed the patents-in-suit in conscious disregard of plaintiffs' rights."

    Plaintiffs are seeking an accounting of actual damages, treble damages and a permanent injunction. In lieu of a permanent injunction, plaintiffs are asking the court to order defendants to take a compulsory license at a reasonable royalty rate and to make quarterly royalty payments.

    Trey Yarbrough of Tyler is representing the plaintiffs with attorneys from Blank Rome LLP in Washington, D.C., of counsel.

    The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis.

    Case No. 6:07-cv-546-LED

  • More News