2013 WL 4048510
J.P.M.L.2013Background
- Brandywine moved for centralization of 34 patent-infringement actions pending in 20 districts under 28 U.S.C. § 1407.
- Defendants widely opposed centralization, except three Delaware defendants who did not oppose centralization but object to Florida as the locale.
- Actions involve six DSL/Internet connectivity-related patents with overlapping factual allegations of infringement.
- Many actions show rapid progression toward resolution via settlements or early dismissals; several have already been dismissed or are nearing conclusion.
- Two actions are advanced procedurally, with claim construction ordered or fully briefed in at least one action, signaling disparate posture among actions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Should centralization be denied given the likelihood of quick resolutions? | Brandywine | Brandywine | Denied centralization |
| Do procedural disparities among actions undermine centralization? | Brandywine | Brandywine | Denied centralization |
| Would centralization hinder efficient resolution of early-progressing actions? | Brandywine | Brandywine | Denied centralization |
| Is there sufficient factual overlap to justify centralization? | Brandywine | Brandywine | Denied centralization |
Key Cases Cited
- In re ArrivalStar S.A. Fleet Mgmt. Sys. Patent Litig., 802 F.Supp.2d 1378 (J.P.M.L.2011) (centralization denied due to quick dismissals)
- In re Genetic Techs. Ltd. ('179) Patent Litig., 883 F.Supp.2d 1337 (J.P.M.L.2012) (centralization denied given litigation history and limited intervention)
- In re CVS Caremark Corp. Wage & Hour Emp’t Practices Litig., 684 F.Supp.2d 1377 (J.P.M.L.2010) (motives of movants scrutinized when centralization advances a particular counsel's interests)
- In re Droplets, Inc., Patent Litig., 908 F.Supp.2d 1377 (J.P.M.L.2012) (denying centralization due to disparate procedural postures)
- In re TR Labs Patent Litig., 896 F.Supp.2d 1337 (J.P.M.L.2012) (centralization considered where expert discovery remained uncompleted)
- Louisianar-Pacific Corp. Trimboard Siding Mktg., Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., 867 F.Supp.2d 1346 (J.P.M.L.2012) (significant procedural disparity prompts closer scrutiny of centralization benefits)