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

Marilyn Tennissen Dec. 20, 2007, 5:20am

Marshall Division, Eastern District of Texas

Dec. 17

  • Coronary Stent Visualization Corp. vs. Philips Electronic N.A. Corp.

    Coronary Stent Visualization Corp. (CSV) claims it holds three patents that teach systems and methods for the visualization and display of medical procedures, including displaying the details of a coronary artery lesion or arterial segment during cineangiograms.

    The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent Nos. 5,054,045; 5,457,728; and 5,822,391.

    CSV alleges that Philips manufactures and sells infringing systems and methods and provides services and instructions for the installation and operation of such systems and methods.

    "Neither plaintiff CSV nor any of its predecessors in interest and to the Patents has granted Philips a license or any other right to make, use, offer for sale, or sell the invention defined by the claims of the Patents," the original complaint states. "CSV has suffered and will continue to suffer damages as a result of defendant Philips' infringing acts."

    CSV is seeking past and future damages with interest and costs to compensate for the infringement and an increase of the award by up to three times. Plaintiff is also asking for attorney fees and court costs.

    Andrew DiNovo of DiNovo Price Ellwanger LLP in Austin and Eric M. Albritton of the Albritton Law Firm in Longview are representing the plaintiff.

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

    Case No. 2:07-CV-544-TJW

    Dec. 18

  • Trover Group Inc. vs Regions Bank

    Trover Group is a Texas corporation formerly known as Dozier Financial Corp. Trover claims to have the rights to U.S. Patent Nos. 5,751,345; and 5,751,346 for Image Retention and Information Security System. The patents relate generally to video monitoring systems, and in particular such systems which store and retrieve images by use of computer equipment and digital storage.

    The original complaint states that in 2006, Regions Bank merged with AmSouth Bancorporation "forming one of the top 10 largest banks in the United States."

    "Prior to this merger, AmSouth began using in its bank branches the AccuTrak digital video surveillance system manufactured and sold by Diebold, Inc.," the complaint states. "Likewise, before the merger, Regions had installed digital video surveillance systems in its bank branches that it had obtained through Verint Video Solutions. Upon information and belief, today Regions is using both systems bought from Diebold and from Verint."

    Trover alleges that Regions is infringing the '345 and '346 Patents by using products and processes that embody the patented inventions without authority.

    Plaintiff is seeking a permanent injunction, treble damages, interest, fees, costs and other relief deemed just and proper.

    Steven Williams of Slater & Matsil LLP in Dallas is attorney-in-charge 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-547-TJW-CE

    Texarkana Division, Eastern District of Texas

    Dec. 12

  • Guthery vs. FMC Corp.

    Texarkana resident B. Eugene Guthery, M.D., claims to have invented a formulation useful for the sanitization of poultry and other meat intended for human consumption.

    One of his inventions was patented by U.S. Patent No. 5,234,703 on Aug. 10, 1993. A continuation of the patent was issued Nov. 15, 1994, as U.S. Patent No. 5,364,650.

    The complaint says FMC was issued U.S. Patent No. 5,632,676 on May 27, 1997, after he spoke to a company representative about his work.

    Guthery believes his conception as to the use of peracetic acid for poultry sanitation pre-dated any work by FMC and that he is entitled to be named as a joint inventor on the patent.

    Guthery is seeking compensatory, punitive and exemplary damages, fees, costs and other relief.

    D. Scott Hemingway of Hemingway & Hansen LLP in Dallas is representing the plaintiff.

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

    Case No. 5:07-CV-186-TJW

    Tyler Division, Eastern District of Texas

    Dec. 18

  • Davis-Lynch Inc. vs. Weatherford International Inc.

    Davis-Lynch is a corporation based in Pearland that claims to have the rights to U.S. Patent No. 6,679,336 for Multi-Purpose Float Equipment and Method issued Jan. 20, 2004. The '336 Patent was a continuation of U.S. Patent No. 6,401,824, issued June 11, 2002.

    On Feb. 3, 2004, Davis-Lynch filed a patent infringement suit against Weatherford based on the '336 and '824 Patents. In the previous case, the court entered an agreed stipulation of dismissal without prejudice to allow the filing of a reexamination for both patents. The reexaminations were issued in October 2007.

    The plaintiff claims that Davis-Lynch "owns the entire right, title and interest of the '336 patent including the right to seek damages for all past infringements."

    David-Lynch alleges that Weatherford infringes the '336 Patent through its Auto-Fill Float Collar.

    The plaintiff is seeking damages, enhanced damages, interest and costs from the infringement.

    Ernest W. Boyd of Mehaffy Weber PC in Houston is representing the plaintiff.

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

    Case No. 6:07-cv-559-LED

  • More News