Category: Technology Licenses
Created On: 2022-04-28
Record Count: 14
- Electrical & Electronics
- Telecommunications Equip
- Telecommunications Svcs & Equip
- Computers & Office Equipment
- Scientific & Technical Instruments
- Utilities Svcs
- Technical Know How
IPSCIO Report Record List
Below you will find the records curated into this collection. This summary includes the complete licensed property description so that you can review and determine if this collection covers the topics, technology or transaction type that is relevant for your needs. The full report will include all relevant deal data such as the royalty base, agreement date, term description, royalty rates and other deal terms. For reference, here is a sample of a full IPSCIO curated royalty rate report: Sample Report
IPSCIO Record ID: 29584
In addition, although the District Court granted Licensor's motion for a permanent injunction against the eight product groups subject to the jury verdict, the District Court granted Licensee's emergency motion to stay the injunction for 90 days through October 15, 2013.
IPSCIO Record ID: 1197
Specifically, the jury found that each of the ten selected patent claims was supported by the written description, and was not anticipated or rendered obvious by prior art; therefore, none of the patent claims were invalid. The jury also found that licensee infringed all eight of the patent claims for which the jury was asked to determine infringement; the court had previously determined on summary judgment that licensee infringed the other two claims at issue in the trial.
IPSCIO Record ID: 3091
With the settlement, Licensee will pay Licensor a one-time fee and the Licensor will not receive any additional payments for sales of AbraxaneÂ®, or any other nabÂ®-Paclitaxel product in the United States or globally. Licensee will acquire a fully-paid up, exclusive, world-wide license to select Licensor's U.S. and foreign patents for AbraxaneÂ®.
At issue was Licenseeâ€™s alleged infringement of Licensorâ€™s patent for the nanoparticulate formulation of the breast cancer drug Abraxane.
A federal jury in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware agreed with that contention, and ordered the Company Licensee to pay an upfront fee and ongoing royalty.
IPSCIO Record ID: 3010
IPSCIO Record ID: 29094
IPSCIO Record ID: 2991
IPSCIO Record ID: 453
IPSCIO Record ID: 26276
This case was tried before a jury in the U.S. District Court from April 10, 2006 through April 28, 2006. After deliberations, on May 4, 2006, the jury rendered a verdict in favor of the Plaintiffs by finding that the NF-kB â€˜516 Claims asserted in the lawsuit are valid and infringed by Lilly through sales of Evista and Xigris in the United States. One defense regarding validity was not submitted to the jury and was instead the subject of a bench trial, as addressed below. The jury awarded damages to the Plaintiffs in the amount of approximately $65.2 million, based on the juryâ€™s determination of a reasonable royalty rate of 2.3% to be paid by Lilly to the Plaintiffs based on U.S. sales of Evista and Xigris from the date of the filing of the lawsuit on June 25, 2002 through February 28, 2006. The jury awarded further damages on an ongoing basis, in amounts to be determined, equal to 2.3% of U.S. sales of Evista and Xigris through the year 2019, when the patent expires. If the verdict is upheld, damages paid by Lilly will be applied first to reimburse us for any unreimbursed legal fees and expenses relating to the litigation. We will receive 91% of the remainder, and the co-plaintiffs will receive 9%.
The dispute involved licensor's U.S. patent covering methods of treating disease by regulating NF-kappa B cell-signaling activity, and jurors awarded damages to licensor and its co-plaintiffs. Licensee plans first to ask the judge to set aside the jury's verdict regarding Evista and Xigris and then to appeal, if necessary.
IPSCIO Record ID: 28463
IPSCIO Record ID: 3896
The final judgment does not account for any continued infringement by licensee after the May 2007 jury verdict. Accounting for any damages arising after the jury verdict will be addressed later by the Court, based on the outcome of any appeal in the case. The Court also permanently enjoined and restrained licensee from further infringement.
IPSCIO Record ID: 5427
A Delaware District Court jury unanimously upheld nCUBE's patent for VOD delivery and found that SeaChange willfully infringed the patent related to communication between a server and a set-top box, filed in 1998.
IPSCIO Record ID: 26011
IPSCIO Record ID: 1341
The Court determined that one of the patents (U.S. Patent 7,058,150) [the â€˜150 patent] had been infringed by the Licensee, and the jury rendered an advisory verdict to the Court that the â€˜150 patent is not invalid, and awarded approximately $0.4 million in damages related to that patent.
The jury reached a unanimous verdict of non-infringement on another patent relating to the Licensees Fibre Channel switch products.
A mistrial was declared on the remaining four patents for which no unanimous verdict was reached. Subsequent to the trial, the Court issued orders consistent with the advisory verdicts of invalidity, and also issued an order that one of the four remaining patents (U.S. Patent 7,471,691) [the'691 patent] had been infringed by us.
On April 4, 2012, we filed a notice of appeal with respect to the â€˜150 patent and the â€˜691 patent infringement findings.
On March 16, 2012, the Court issued a decision concerning injunctive relief for the â€˜150 and the â€˜691 patents.
The decision provided, in part, for a sunset period of 18 months relating to the â€˜150 patent, starting on October 12, 2011.
The sunset period allows the Licensee to sell the affected products to existing customers for specific customer devices, subject to limitations relating to when the products had been qualified and when certain firm orders had been placed.
The decision further provided for a sunset period of 18 months relating to the â€˜691 patent, starting on December 16, 2011.
The affected products for the â€˜691 patent include the SOC 320, SOC 422, and SOC 442 ASICs, products containing them, and products not colorably different from them.
The decision further provided for Licensee to pay a royalty on all sales of such products made during The sunset period. The decision also clarified that foreign sales (outside the U.S.) are beyond the scope of the suit.
IPSCIO Record ID: 714
Licensor hereby grants to the Licensee a world-wide exclusive, nontransferable, personal, subLicenseable, as a result of the litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Litigation was tried to the jury, resulting in a jury verdict on December 8, 2006 of infringement of claims 1, 8, and 15-17 of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,673,064. The License granted under this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect from the effective date until January 4, 2020.