Legal Opinion
Smart Wearable Technologies Inc. v. Fitbit, Inc.
District Court, W.D. Virginia
Decided April 6, 2017No. Civil Action No. 3:16CV00077PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Glen E. Conrad, Chief United States District Judge ■
Smart Wearable Technologies • Inc. (“Smart Wearable”) filed this action against Fitbit, Inc. (“Fitbit”) for alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,997,882 B1 (“the ’882 Patent”). Smart Wearable asserts claims of direct and indirect infringement. Fitbit has moved to dismiss the claims of indirect infringement under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court held a hearing on the motion on March 22, 2017. For the reasons set forth below, the motion to dismiss will be granted in part and denied in part.
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Edwards v. City of GoldsboroCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1999
- Gordon Goines v. Valley Community Services BoardCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2016
- Car Carriers, Inc. v. Ford Motor Company and Nu-Car Carriers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Cellcontrol, Inc. v. Mill Mountain Capital, LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 2022
- GLASTON CORPORATION v. HHH EQUIPMENT RESOURCESDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2022
- Optigenex, Inc. v. Wolfson Berg LimitedDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2020
- SAFE HAVEN WILDLIFE REMOVAL AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT EXPERTS, LLC v. MERIDIAN WILDLIFE SERVICES, LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 2023
- Swissdigital USA Co., Ltd. v. Avon Lifestyle Pvt. Ltd. and Naina ParekhDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2026