Legal Opinion
Exergen Corp. v. Brooklands Inc.
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided February 20, 2018No. CIVIL ACTION NO. 12–12243–DPWPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DOUGLAS P. WOODLOCK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The plaintiff Exergen's initiative in bringing this patent infringement litigation has proven counterproductive. The case occasioned my decision to hold the asserted claims 51 and 54 of the '938 patent invalid. Exergen v. Brooklands, Inc. , 125 F.Supp.3d 307 (D. Mass. 2015). Exergen, nevertheless, undertook to continue the litigation by seeking a determination that it did not commit inequitable conduct with respect to obtaining the invalid patent claims in the first place.
Before reaching the issue of inequitable conduct, I consider it prudent…
2Cases cited54 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Honig v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Keystone Driller Co. v. General Excavator Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ocado Innovation Ltd., et al. v. AutoStore AS, et al.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 2021
- Ocado Innovation Ltd. v. AutoStore ASDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2021