Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rgb Systems, Inc. v. Kramer Electronics

January 17, 2012

RGB SYSTEMS, INC.
v.
KRAMER ELECTRONICS, LTD, ET AL.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable David O. Carter, Judge

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Title:

Julie Barrera Not Present Courtroom Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFFS: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS:

NONE PRESENT NONE PRESENT

PROCEEDING (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO

FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Before the Court is a Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Complaint to Add Additional Parties (Dkt. 31). The Court finds this matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; Local Rule 7-15. After considering the moving, opposing and replying papers thereon, and for the reasons stated below, the Court hereby GRANTS the Motion. The Court OVERRULES Defendants' evidentiary objections to the Declaration of Jim Slominsky (Dkt. 43).

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff RGB Systems, Inc. dba Extron Electronics ("RGB") owns U.S. Patent No. 7,163,405 for Connector Assembly Apparatus for Electronic Equipment and Method for Using Same. (Compl ¶ 1.) RGB alleges that Defendants manufacture, supply, and/or distribute electronic products including switchers that are covered by one or more claims in the '405 patent. (Id. ¶ 13.) RGB further alleges these electronic products infringe the '405 patent. (Id. ¶ 14.)

In response to RGB's complaint, Defendants Kramer Electronics, Ltd., Kramer Electronics USA, Inc., and Sierra Video Systems filed an answer, followed by an amended answer.*fn1

Defendants assert affirmative defenses of non-infringement, that the '405 patent is "invalid, void, and/or unenforceable" due to abandonment during prosecution, failure to name the true inventor(s), obviousness, failure to disclose best mode, and under the public use and on-sale bars. Based on the alleged trivial nature of the suit, Defendants argue that filing of the case was subjective bad faith, making this an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285. In addition, Defendants bring a counterclaim for declaratory judgment of non-infringement, invalidity, and/or unenforceability.

Plaintiff now seeks leave to file a First Amended Complaint ("FAC") to add additional parties Procurement and Government Sales, Inc. ("PGS") and Audio-Video Supply, Inc. ("AVS"), arguing that these distributors sell ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.