Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in Getz Balich x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Patent | Connecticut
Order on Motion to Seal Order on Motion to Dismiss
ORDER granting in part 81 Motion to Dismiss. The parties in this action agree that there no longer is any dispute requiring court intervention, but they disagree as to the particulars of a dismissal. This case is past the point at which Plaintiff may unilaterally withdraw its claims. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1). Thus, the action may only be dismissed "on terms that the court considers proper." Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2). Plaintiff asks the court to dismiss its claims with prejudice, and proposes that its covenant not to sue deprives the court of jurisdiction over any of Defendant's counterclaims. Defendant would consent to dismissal of its remaining counterclaim, but only without prejudice, and only if (1) the covenant were broad enough to cover other, related patents, and (2) Plaintiff were ordered to pay its costs and fees for a period it contends Plaintiff needlessly prolonged litigation. The court finds it improper to dismiss Defendant's counterclaim with prejudice. According to the Federal Rules, "[i]f a defendant has pleaded a counterclaim before being served with the plaintiff's motion to dismiss, the action may be dismissed over the defendant's objection only if the counterclaim can remain pending for independent adjudication." Id. Defendant did assert its counterclaims before the instant motion was served, and does object to Plaintiff's request for dismissal. And the court notes that Plaintiff's covenant not to sue is not absolute; it only covers the allegedly infringing product as it existed on July 16, 2024, or any similar product with only "minor variation," as that phrase is defined in the covenant. The covenant therefore leaves open the possibility of future litigation should Plaintiff deem an alteration to Defendant's product as more than a minor variation. And relatedly, the court is not convinced in the first instance that the covenant not to sue moots Defendant's position that Plaintiff's patent is invalid, as success on that argument would allow for major alterations to its produce. Accordingly, the court finds it appropriate to preserve Defendant some recourse to reraise its claim should circumstances arise in which that would be appropriate. Given this conclusion, the also will dismiss Plaintiff's claims without prejudice. Next, the court finds that Defendant has overstated how favorable the Markman ruling was to it, and disagrees that the ruling is any indication that Plaintiff prolonged this case needlessly. Plaintiff has diligently prosecuted its case, and asserts that it decided to cease litigation upon realizing that Defendant's market share was so small as to render further litigation cost ineffective. Plaintiff also produced documentation to support this assertion. The court finds this to be a credible and reasonable position, and therefore declines to sanction Plaintiff by ordering it to pay any of Defendant's fees.Accordingly, the court hereby (1) dismisses without prejudice all Plaintiff's claims, and (2) dismisses Defendant's remaining counterclaim without prejudice. Both parties shall pay their own costs and fees. Finally, pursuant to Local Rule 5(e), the court finds that good cause exists to seal Plaintiff's memorandum in support of its motion and its reply memorandum and related exhibits, docketed at ECF Nos. 80 and 87 , as they contain confidential commercial information. Further, there being no ascertainable date by which these documents should be unsealed they shall remain under seal until further order of the court. The Clerk of Court is asked to please close this case. It is so ordered.. Signed by Judge Omar A. Williams on 8/14/26. (RW)
Copyright | Connecticut
Reply to Response to Motion
REPLY to Response to 389 MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law Under FRCP 50(B), Or A New Trial Under FRCP 59(A) filed by Learneo, Inc.. (Gratz, Joseph)
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
First Name
Last Name
Job Title
PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.
Password (at least 8 characters required)
Confirm Password
Law360 may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.