Legal Opinion
Celsis In Vitro, Inc. v. Cellzdirect, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided March 13, 2015No. Case No. 10 C 4053PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Milton I. Shadur, Senior United States District Judge
Defendants CellzDirect, Inc. and Invi-trogen Corp. (hereafter collectivized as “LTC,” the corporation that has succeeded to their interests) bring a motion for summary judgment of patent invalidity under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 and 112 (Dkt. 335).1 Also pending is LTC’s Motion To Limit Damages to a Reasonable Royalty on LTC’s Accused Sales (Dkt. 337). Because this Court finds the patent at issue invalid under Section 101, LTC’s Dkt. 335 motion is granted and its second Dkt. 337 motion is consequently denied as moot.
Stand…
2Cases cited22 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
- Edward H. Phillips v. Awh Corporation, Hopeman Brothers, Inc., and Lofton Corporation, Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2012
- Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2014
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rapid Litigation Management Ltd. v. CellzDirect, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
- Exergen Corp. v. Brooklands Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2015
- Neochloris, Inc. v. Emerson Process Management LLLPDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2015
- Thales Visionix, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015