U.S. District Court Grants Inag Inc. Order to Strike Expert Report in Patent Infringement Case
Want to get our alerts?
Click “Subscribe Now” to get attorney insights on the latest developments in a range of services and industries.
Dickinson Wright PLLC is pleased to announce that U.S. District Court, District of Nevada recently issued an order in Inag, Inc. v. Richar, LLC granting plaintiff’s Motion to Strike an expert report, a big win for Inag in the multi-year patent infringement case.
“We are thrilled with the Court’s decision to grant our motion to strike and allow the case to proceed forward,” says John S. Artz, Intellectual Property Litigation Practice Group Co-Chair. “The report focused on claims of invalidity that weren’t previously disclosed by the defendant and shouldn’t be considered in this case. We look forward to moving on to the next stage of this case.”
The District Court also denied the Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Amend its Invalidity Contentions due to lack of diligence and a lack of specificity of disclosure required by Local Patent Rules. Since the Expert Report was based on invalidity contentions that weren’t in the Defendant’s original response and the Motion to Amend was denied, the Court ruled that the Expert Report must be stricken in its entirety from the record.
Inag, Inc. filed a patent infringement case against Richar, LLC back in 2016 contending that its card-style roulette wheel violated one of Inag’s patents. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued an Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate in 2020 confirming Inag Patent’s patentability allowing the case to proceed.
Dickinson Wright Attorneys John S. Artz, John Krieger, Franklin Smith and Ariana Pellegrino represent Inag, Inc.
“We are thrilled with the Court’s decision to grant our motion to strike and allow the case to proceed forward,” says John S. Artz, Intellectual Property Litigation Practice Group Co-Chair. “The report focused on claims of invalidity that weren’t previously disclosed by the defendant and shouldn’t be considered in this case. We look forward to moving on to the next stage of this case.”
The District Court also denied the Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Amend its Invalidity Contentions due to lack of diligence and a lack of specificity of disclosure required by Local Patent Rules. Since the Expert Report was based on invalidity contentions that weren’t in the Defendant’s original response and the Motion to Amend was denied, the Court ruled that the Expert Report must be stricken in its entirety from the record.
Inag, Inc. filed a patent infringement case against Richar, LLC back in 2016 contending that its card-style roulette wheel violated one of Inag’s patents. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued an Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate in 2020 confirming Inag Patent’s patentability allowing the case to proceed.
Dickinson Wright Attorneys John S. Artz, John Krieger, Franklin Smith and Ariana Pellegrino represent Inag, Inc.
