Marshall Division

Jan. 19

  • Owen Oil Tools LP v. Hunting Titan Ltd. et al.

    Owen Oil Tools is a Delaware limited partnership with its principal place of business in Houston.

    The defendants are Hunting Titan Ltd., Titan Specialties Ltd., Titan G.P., TSI Acquisition Holdings and Hunting Energy Services Inc.

    The defendants are accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 8,079,296 issued Dec. 20, 2011, for Device and Methods for Firing Perforating Guns.

    The plaintiff is asking the court for an injunction to prevent further infringement and for an award of damages, interest, treble damages, costs and attorney's fees.

    Owen Oil Tools is represented by Steven J. Mitby of Ahmadd, Zavitsanos, Anaipakos, Alavi & Mensing in Houston; John Zavitsanos and Reed Smith in Houston; and T. John Ward Jr., Wesley Hill and Claire Abernathy Henry of Ward & Smith Law Firm in Longview.

    A jury trial is requested.

    U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap is assigned to the case.

    Case No. 2:12-cv-00034

    Tyler Division

    Jan. 18

  • Lonestar Inventions v. Dialog Semiconductor Inc.

    Lonestar Inventions is a Texas limited partnership.

    Defendant Dialog Semiconductor is accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 5,208,725 issued May 4, 1993, for High Capacitance Structure in a Semiconductor Device. Specifically, Lonestar argues that the defendant's product Apple/Dialog Power Management IC chip is infringing on one or more claims of the '725 patent.

    The plaintiff is asking for an award of damages caused by the infringement, plus attorney's fees and court costs.

    Lonestar Inventions is represented by Matthew J.M. Prebeg of Clearman Prebeg LLP in Houston.

    A jury trial is requested.

    U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis is assigned to the case.

    Case No. 6:12-cv-00025

    Jan. 19

  • Merck & CIE et al v. Macoven et al

    The plaintiffs are Merck & Cie, South Alabama Medical Science Foundation and Pamlab LLC.

    Merck & Cie is a Swiss corporation with a principal place of business in Switzerland. SAMSF is a not for profit research corporation with its principal place of business in Mobile, Ala. Pamlab is a Louisiana limited liability company having a principal place of business in Covington, La.

    The defendants are Macoven Pharmaceuticals, Gnosis, S.p.A., Gnosis USA Inc. and Gnosis Bioresearch.

    The defendants are accused of infringing on:

  • U.S. Patent No. 5,997,915 issued on Dec. 7, 1999, for Compositions for Human and Animal Consumption Containing Reduced Folates and Methods for Making and Using the Same;

  • U.S. Patent No. 6,011,040 issued on Jan. 4, 2000. for Use of Tetrahydrofolates in Natural Stereoisomeric Form for the Production of a Pharmaceutical Preparation Suitable for Influencing the Homocysteine Level, Particularly for Assisting the Remethylation of Homocysteine;

  • U.S. Patent No. 6,673,381 issued on Jan. 6, 2004, for Uses for Food and Vitamin Preparations Containing the Natural Isomer of Reduced Folates; and

  • U.S. Patent No. 6,254,904 issued on July 3, 2001, U.S. Patent No. 7,674,490 issued on March 9, 2010, and U.S. Patent No. 7,172,778 issued on Feb. 6, 2007 for Food and Vitamin Preparations Containing the Natural Isomer of Reduced Folates.

    The plaintiffs are seeking an award of damages, treble damages, attorney's fees, interest and court costs.

    The plaintiffs are represented by Dwayne C. Norton, Thomas J. Parker, Robert E. Hanlon and Natalie Clayton of Alston & Bird in New York, N.Y.

    A jury trial is requested.

    U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis is assigned to the case.

    Case No. 6:12-cv-00027

  • Landmark Technology v. Maidenform Brands Inc.

    Landmark Technology is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Tyler.

    The defendant is accused of infringing on U.S. Patent No. 5,576,951 issued Nov. 19, 1996, for Automated Sales and Services System; U.S. Patent No. 6,289,319 issued Sept. 11, 2001, for Automated Business and Financial Transaction Processing System; and U.S. Patent No. 7,010,508 issued March 7, 2006, for Automated Multimedia Data Processing Network.

    The plaintiff is asking the court for an injunction to prevent further infringement and for an award of damages, reasonable royalty or lost profits, enhanced damages, court costs, attorney's fees and interest.

    Landmark Technology is represented by Charles Ainsworth and Robert Christopher Bunt of Parker, Bunt & Ainsworth in Tyler and Stanley M. Gibson and Gregory S. Cordey of Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP of Los Angeles, Calif.

    A jury trial is requested.

    U.S. District Judge Leonard Davis is assigned to the case.

    Case No. 6:12-cv-00028

    Jan. 20

  • Vernon F. Minton v. Gunn et al

    The defendants are Jerry W. Gunn, Williams Squire & Wren, James E. Wren, Slusser & Frost LLP, William C. Slusser, Slusser Wilson & Partridge LLP and Michael E. Wilson.

    The lawsuit relates to U.S. Patent No. 6,014,643 issued Jan. 11, 2000, for a method and network for trading securities, which was at issue in Case No. 9:00-CV-0009, Vernon F. Minton, Plaintiff v. National Association of Securities Dealers Inc., Defendant.

    The defendants are accused of negligence for failing to timely plead and brief the experimental use defense in response to the claim of the on-sale bar by the NASD and NASDAQ and for failing to timely plead and brief the experimental use defense in response to the court's order for briefing on the obviousness issue.

    Minton is asking the court for an award of actual damages, interest, and court costs.

    The plaintiff is represented by Coyt Randal Johnston, Robert L. Tobey and Coyt Randal Johnston Jr. of Johnston Tobey P.C. in Dallas; Gregory W. Carr of Carr LLP in Dallas; and Theodore F. Shiells of Sheills Law Firm in Dallas.

    A jury trial is requested.

    U.S. District Judge Leonard E. Davis is assigned to the case.

    Case No. 6:12-cv-00029

  • More News