The Federal Judicial Center patent video. I find it exciting to watch, for a moment, because it reminds me the start of a jury trial...Federal Judicial Center
Every once in a while, parties will offer a "patent law expert" with opinions about patent office proceedings, such as patent prosecution. Often, smart opposing counsel will move to exclude that testimony, and it's not unusual for the Court to grant those motions.
A decision last week reminded of this issue. Late last week, Judge Burke granted a motion to preclude some expert testimony about patent prosecution, and excluded expert testimony regarding the patent examiner and plaintiffs' state of mind:
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the portion of Plaintiffs' Daubert motion …
If you've spent way too much time on the internet lately, you'll likely have seen way too many memes about how kids today don't understand the order of operations. The typical format is some bookface (tm) post along the lines of:
999,999 out of 1,000,000 people get this wrong:
3 + 4(3+2) - 2 X 3 = ?
17
The darkness at the end of all time
97
(audible belch)
And then there's someone confidently giving the wrong answer.
Of course, the correct answer can only be arrived at by following the prescribed order of operations. This same concept comes up quite often in civil procedure, but the application is often less straightforward than good old …
This report, produced by the Court, is available on the Court's website. I’d encourage our readers to peruse the full report, but we highlight a few interesting statistics and announcements below.
IP Cases Continue to Dominate the Docket
In 2022, there was an increase in jury trials to 19 in the District of Delaware. Patent/IP cases accounted for 44% of all civil filings in the last 7 years and 43% in 2022 alone.
Nationally, patent filings decreased from 4,037 filings to 3,854. In the District of Delaware in 2022, 685 patent cases were filed, a 23.04 percent decrease from the previous year of 890. Delaware is second in the nation, after …
Breaking news from our favorite court! Our own Magistrate Judge Hall has been nominated to fill the Judge Andrews' vacancy once he takes senior status at the end of this year.
As with Judge Williams, the White House provided a helpful and succinct summary of Magistrate Judge Hall's qualifications: “Judge Jennifer L. Hall has served as a United States Magistrate Judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware since 2019. Previously, Judge Hall served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Delaware from 2011 to 2015 and served as Chief of the office’s …
(d) Standards for Professional Conduct. Subject to such modifications as may be required or permitted by federal statute, court rule, or decision, all attorneys admitted or authorized to practice before this Court, including attorneys admitted on motion or otherwise, shall be governed by the Model Rules of Professional Conduct of the American Bar Association (“Model Rules”), as amended from time to time.
D. Del. Local Rule 83.6(d). According to the Judge Jordan, back in 2004:
[T]he ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct, not the Delaware Rules of …
If you're invested enough in Delaware litigation to be reading this blog, you will be aware that Judge Stark is slated to leave us soon, and the district has set forth some guidance on what will happen to his cases when he departs. The Court has been reassigning Judge Stark's cases in batches since the beginning of February, and I have arbitrarily decided (because its Friday) that today we have enough data to do a quick rundown of where the cases are going.
As of today, the Court has transferred a mere 26 of Judge Stark's patent cases (counting related cases as a single case),whichhave been distributed as follows:
This month, COVID has not directly caused jury trial delays for the District of Delaware, though we don't know of any jury trials that went forward in February.
In the next few months, the Court has a busy docket, filled with patent cases and sprinkled with cases before visiting judges. In particular, Judge L. Felipe Restrepo, sitting by designation from the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, is scheduled to handle three out of the sixteen upcoming cases. Judge Stark is also scheduled to handle two upcoming jury trials, though this appears likely to change given his confirmation to the Federal Circuit.
2/7/2022:Skeans v. Key Commercial Finance LLC, C.A. 18-1516-CFC-SRF (D. Del.): In this fraud/estate case, Plaintiff requested that the in-person pretrial conference be adapted into a virtual one after Plaintiff’s residential community went into a COVID lockdown, preventing his physical attendance. (D.I. 117). Thereafter, the trial was postponed due to "a change in the Court's trial calendar," with the parties' consent.
2/14/2022:Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., C.A. 18-1802-MN (D. Del.): The parties stayed this five-day patent trial at the last moment, according to the docket. The Court previously rescheduled it from January due to COVID concerns for witnesses and attorneys traveling from outside the U.S. (D.I. 399).
2/22/2022:Deshields v. JR Rents Inc., C.A. 20-1626-MN-SRF (D. Del.): Stipulated ...
Big news! The White House announced today that Judge Leonard P. Stark of the District of Delaware is set to be nominated to the Federal Circuit.
Assuming he is confirmed, Judge Stark will actually be the second judge to be elevated to an appellate court from the District of Delaware in recent memory, following The Honorable Kent A. Jordan's elevation to the Third Circuit in 2006.
Congratulations to Judge Stark!
Another Judicial Vacancy? No problem.
Despite its enormouspatentcase load, the District of Delaware remains a small court, with just four district court judges (although the Judicial Conference …
At this point, every trial listed in our last jury trial update has been continued or delayed, almost all due to coronavirus concerns. Here is the breakdown:
January 25, 2021:Novel Drug Solutions, LLC et al v. Harrow Health, Inc., C.A. No. 18-539-MN (D. Del.) (Noreika, J.): After a joint request to delay trial due in part to coronavirus issues, this trial was "continued to dates TBD."
February 17, 2021: U.S. v. Joanna L. Crane, C.A. No. 20-51-CFC (D. Del.) (Connolly, J.): This trial was continued for reasons unrelated to COVID-19.
February 22, 2021: U.S. v. Davine Boyce, C.A. No. 20-43-CFC (D. Del.) (Connolly, J.): Delayed …
This blog is for general informational purposes. It is not an offer to perform legal services, and should not be considered a substitute for legal advice. Nothing in this blog should be construed as forming an attorney-client relationship. If you have legal questions, please consult counsel in your jurisdiction.
