Tyler Division, Eastern District of Texas
Dec. 11
Plaintiff Variant Inc. claims to own the rights to U.S. Patent No. 7,379,900 for a System for Marketing Goods and Services Utilizing Computerized Central and Remote Facilities.
Variant alleges that 13 companies are infringing the '900 Patent. Defendants are Flexsol Packaging Corp. of Pompano Beach doing business as Flexsol Packaging Corp., David's Supermarkets Inc., New Distributing Co. Inc, J.C. Evans Construction Holdings, Mike & Mike LLC, Sun Belle Inc., Kingham Brothers Management LLC, Tidelands Geophysical Co. Inc., Adams Golf Inc., Sub-Zero Inc., The Biltmore Company, First Act Inc. and Robinson Home Products Inc.
"Defendants' actions complained of herein are causing irreparable harm and monetary damage to Plaintiff and will continue to do so unless and until Defendants are enjoined and restrained by this Court," the complaint states.
Variant is seeking injunctive relief, compensatory damages, treble damages, attorneys' fees, interest and costs and other just relief. The plaintiff is also asking the court to order the impounding and destruction of all defendants' apparatuses that infringe the '900 Patent.
Anthony G. Simon of Simon Passante PC of St. Louis, Mo., is representing the plaintiff.
The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis.
Case No. 6:08-cv-478-LED
Plaintiff Document Generation claims to own the rights to U.S. Patent No. 5,267,155 for an Apparatus and Method for Computer-Assisted Document Generation.
The complaint names eight defendant companies and products that it alleges are infringing the '155 Patent.
The companies and products are Allscripts HealthMatics HER, Cerner Power Chart, Sage Intergy EHR, McKesson Total Practice Partner, McKesson Total Practice Partner Patient Records, McKesson Practice Point Chart, Misys EMR, Meditech Enterprise Medical Record, Epic Epiccare Ambulatory EMR, Eclipsys Sunrise Clinical Manager.
"Defendants' actions complained of herein are causing irreparable harm and monetary damage to Plaintiff and will continue to do so unless and until Defendants are enjoined and restrained by this Court," the complaint states.
Document Generation is seeking injunctive relief, compensatory damages, treble damages, attorneys' fees, interest, costs and other just relief. The plaintiff is also asking the court to order the impounding and destruction of all defendants' apparatuses that infringe the '900 Patent.
Anthony G. Simon of Simon Passante PC of St. Louis, Mo., and Gregory P. Love of the Love Law Firm in Longview are representing the plaintiff.
The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis.
Case No. 6:08-cv-479-LED
Dec. 12
Plaintiff Raul Chirife is a citizen of Paraguay residing in Buenos Aires, Argentina. According to the original complaint, Chirife is a medical doctor with extensive experience in cardiology and is the owner and inventor of the patent-in-suit and the copyrights and trade secrets at issue in the action.
"Through his ongoing work in cardiology and his persistent efforts to improve the lives of cardiac patients, Dr. Chirife invented a significantly-improved pacemaker," the complaint states. "Dr. Chirife realized that standard pacemaker timing – based upon delivery of pacing pulses to the right atrium and ventricle – was not optimal. And through research and study, Dr. Chirife developed a new pacemaker that could restore normal and optimal timing between the upper and lower chambers of the left side of the heart, a process known as AV Optimization."
U.S. Patent No. 5,179,949 was issued to Dr. Chirife on Jan. 19, 1993, for a Cardiac Pacemaker with Automatic A-V Programming for Optimization of Left Heart A-V Interval.
Chirife claims after the '949 Patent was issued, he tried to interest pacemaker companies in his improved product without much success. Then in February 2003, the complaint states, the doctor began "formal talks with defendants about how defendants could use Dr. Chirife's work and advancements to improve the quality of life for pacemaker patients."
After expressing interest in the products, the suit claims the defendants "embarked on a scheme to defraud Dr. Chirife" by falsely representing that they were interested in a mutually-beneficial endeavor when they actually intended to use the product information for themselves.
The plaintiff alleges not only patent infringement, but also copyright infringement, trade secret misappropriation, fraud, breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and unjust enrichment.
Dr. Chirife is seeking injunctive relief, compensatory and enhanced damages, interest, costs, attorneys' fees and other just and proper relief.
Christopher D. Banys of the Lanier Law Firm is lead attorney for the plaintiff, along with Wesley Hill of Ireland, Carroll & Kelley PC in Tyler.
The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis.
Case No. 6:08-cv-480-LED