One of my most vivid memories of life as a young lad, was a wrestling tournament when I was 12-ish. I was not a gifted wrestler, and I knew it, as did everyone with a passing interest in the sport. I'd made it through several rounds of tournaments, mostly by virtue of being in a less populous weight class and being not quite last. By the time I got to sectionals -- the last tournament before state -- It was just me and two other guys, both of whom looked to be about 45. They were from neighboring farm towns (where they presumably did the work of a whole team of oxen themselves each day after eating 4 dozen eggs) and were bitter rivals. While I sat in the bleachers for about three hours, consuming snickers after snickers, grimly awaiting my match, they engaged in a series of increasingly rambunctious sparring matches.
Eventually one just picked up the other and through him into the bleachers, breaking a few minor bones. After initially raising his arms in righteous triumph he was led away by some polite referees and angry parents, never to be seen again (by me). There was briefly talk that I would still wrestle the maimed one, but his coach decided that was a bad idea, and I wholeheartedly agreed.
And that's the story of how I went to state.
Smooth Segue
It's also why I have a soft spot for default judgment cases, like the one Judge Williams decided yesterday
Actual Legal News
The complaint in Mentone Solutions LLC v. Cobham Technologies, Inc., C.A. No. 22-131-GBW, is probably the shortest I've ever seen in a patent case, coming in at a scant 3 pages. It did, however attach a claim chart showing how the accused product allegedly infringed a claim of the patent in suit (although it relied pretty much entirely on the products use of a the DC-HSPA+ standard).
The defendant never answered and so a default was entered and plaintiff moved for default judgment. Judge Williams, however, denied the motion for default because the plaintiff failed to show that the "unchallenged facts constitute a legitimate cause of action." Specifically:
Although the Court must take Mentone's factual allegations as true , these factual allegations-which can charitably be described as sparse-fail to establish that Cobham infringed the '413 patent. Specifically, Mentone' s Complaint fails to establish that Cobham made, used, or sold the Accused Instrumentalities in the United States as required to state a claim for direct infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). Thus, the Court cannot conclude that "the unchallenged facts constitute a legitimate cause of action" for direct patent infringement.
Mentone, C.A. No. 22-131-GBW (D. Del. Oct. 11, 2022) (Mem. Op.)
Indeed, the only allegation in the complaint referencing an actual infringing act failed to specify that the acts occurred in the US.
Cobham had made, used and sold during the life of the ‘‘413 Patent a series of
products identified as the Explorer 540 BGAN M2M (“Accused Instrumentalities”).
Ultimately, Judge Williams did grant leave for the plaintiff to amend the complaint to correct this deficiency, but noted that doing so would moot the already entered default.
If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing to receive free e-mail updates about new posts.
