Marshall Division, Eastern District of Texas
Jan. 22
Plaintiff SBJ is a Texas liability company with its principal place of business in Dallas. SBJ claims it is the owner by assignment to the rights of U.S. Patent No. 6,330,592 B1 issued Dec. 11, 2001, for a Method, Memory, Product and Code for Displaying Pre-Customized Content Associated with Visitor Data.
Inventors Michael K. Makuch and Neil Webber assigned their rights to the '592 Patent to Vignette. SBJ acquired the '592 Patent on Jan. 18, 2007.
SBJ alleges that defendants Blockbuster, Sears Brands, Sears Holdings Corp., Overstock.com, Buy.com, Barnes & Noble, Nordstrom Inc. and Toys "R" Us are infringing the '592 Patent through various Web sites that provide pre-customized displays that include recommendations capability.
The plaintiff claims it has suffered monetary damages in an amount not yet determined and that it will be irreparably harmed in the future unless defendants' infringing activities are enjoined by the court.
"If facts learned in discovery show that Defendants' infringement of the '592 Patent is or has been willful, Plaintiff reserves the right to request such a finding at the time of trial," the complaint states.
SBJ is seeking injunctive relief, compensatory and treble damages, interest, attorneys' fees and other just and proper relief.
Eric Albritton of the Albritton Law Firm in Longview is representing the plaintiff, with attorneys from Sprinkle IP Law Group PC and the Kaeske Law Firm in Austin.
The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge T. John Ward.
Case No. 2:09-cv-029-TJW
Sherman Division, Eastern District of Texas
Jan. 22
Plaintiff Elan claims to own the rights to U.S. Patent No. 5,429,824 and U.S. Patent No. 5,298,262.
The '824 Patent was issued July 4, 1995, for Use of Tyloxapol as a Nanoparticle Stabilizer and Dispersant. The '262 Patent was issued March 24, 1994, for Use of Ionic Cloud Point Modifiers to Prevent Particle Aggregation during Sterilization.
The plaintiff alleges that defendant Alcon (including Alcon Laboratories Inc. and Alcon Manufacturing Ltd.) is infringing the patents-in-suit. The infringement includes the sale of Alcon's Azopt brinzolamide ophthalmic suspension.
According to the complaint, throughout 1995 and 1996, Alcon sought and obtained from NanoSystems LLC assistance in formulating brinzolamide. Throughout 1995 and 1996, NanoSystems owned the '824 and '262 Patents.
In 1998, Elan Corporation PLC acquired NanoSystems LLC and subsequently transferred ownership of the patents to Elan Pharma International Ltd.
Alcon and NanoSystems entered into contractual agreements relating to NanoSystem's development of a brinzolamide formulation using its nanoparticle technology, the complaint states.
"Those agreements included a Confidentiality Agreement, an Experimentation and Evaluation Agreement and an Optimization Agreement," it states. "Sometime after 1998 Alcon began selling Azopt."
Therefore, Elan claims Alcon's infringement has been willful and deliberate.
Elan is seeking compensatory and treble damages, interest, attorneys' fees and other just and equitable relief.
Stephen Scheve of Baker Botts LLP in Houston and Clyde Siebman of Siebman, Reynolds, Burg, Phillips & Smith LLP are representing the plaintiff.
The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Richard A. Shell.
Case No. 4:09-cv-032-RAS
Jan. 23
According to the original complaint, plaintiff Caliper Life Sciences is a provider of technologies that enable researchers in the life sciences to create life-saving and life-enhancing medicines and diagnostic tests.
The company's portfolio includes state-of-the-art microfluidics technology and products, lab automation and liquid handling products, pre-clinical optical imaging technologies and products and drug discovery and development outsourcing solutions, according to the complaint.
The complaint arises out of allegations of infringement of 11 Caliper patents by Shimadzu Corp. and Shimadzu Scientific Instruments Inc.
The patents-in-suit are:
According to the complaint, Shimadzu manufactures, offers to sell and sells the MCE-202 MultiNA, a micro-chip based electrophoresis system that performs DNA and RNA size confirmation and quantitation. The plaintiff alleges the MultiNA system infringes the Caliper patents-in-suit.
Caliper also alleges that the infringements have been willful and deliberate.
The plaintiff is seeking injunctive relief, compensatory damages, treble damages for willful infringement, costs, attorneys' fees and other appropriate relief.
Michael E. Jones of Potter Minton in Tyler and attorneys from Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox PLLC in Washington, D.C., are representing the plaintiff.
The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Richard A. Shell.
Case No. 4:09-cv-034-RAS