United States: Thelen Prevails For CAP Wireless In 18-Month Patent Infringement Battle
Last Updated: March 13 2007

SILICON VALLEY AND LOS ANGELES (March 12, 2007)—After an 18-month legal battle over two patents owned by the University of California and licensed to Wavestream Corporation, Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP client CAP Wireless was granted summary judgment of noninfringement of all claims of both patents in the U.S. District Court, Central District of California. 

At issue were two patents for complex solid-state microwave spatial power combiner technology for use in radar and satellite communications, which CAP Wireless was developing under contract with the U.S. Air Force. 

When Wavestream filed an infringement suit against CAP Wireless over the patents, the company turned to the Intellectual Property litigation team at Thelen. Partners David Ritchie and Bob Camors from the firm’s Silicon Valley office and Brooks Marshall from the Los Angeles office led CAP Wireless’ defense, with assistance from Silicon Valley associate Richard Swope

The plaintiff was represented by attorneys from the Los Angeles office of Morrison & Foerster LLP.

At the first case management conference, the court declined to set a Markman hearing, and ordered that summary judgment would be the vehicle for claim construction.  After a lengthy discovery phase, the court adopted nearly all of Thelen’s motion for summary judgment of noninfringement.

The plaintiff’s team then attempted to make a case of indirect infringement under the Doctrine of Equivalents, but this, too, was rejected by the court, which ultimately granted CAP Wireless summary judgment of noninfringement on all remaining claims.  

"One of the key holdings in the court’s order was that the plaintiff never developed its case beyond ‘reserving the right’ to allege infringement under the doctrine of equivalents during discovery," said Thelen team leader David Ritchie.  "The court ruled that it was too late to do so in the opposition to the motion for summary judgment of noninfringement."

The plaintiff’s legal team did not produce any facts or evidence in response to interrogatory requests, did not discuss infringement under the doctrine of equivalents in its expert report, and made no move to supplement its discovery responses after the claim construction order.  Therefore, the court found that the plaintiff was unable to show a genuine issue of material fact in its opposition to CAP Wireless’ motion.

About Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP
Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP is an international law firm with approximately 630 attorneys, and offices in New York, San Francisco, Washington, DC, Los Angeles, Silicon Valley, Hartford, Northern New Jersey, Shanghai, and London. The firm provides superior legal services in complex commercial litigation; corporate and capital markets transactions; project and asset finance; construction; labor and employment; intellectual property; information technology; domestic and international tax; employee benefits; government affairs; and real estate.

For more information, contact:

Kevin Livingston
National Manager of Public Relations
Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Press Releases from this Firm
Recent Content from this Firm
By Stephen Palley
By David Tang, Jun Li, Bill Zhang
By David Bacon
By Mary Mathew, R. Michael Cestaro
By James Mitchell, Michael Connolly
By David Tang, Julian Y. Zou
By David Bacon, Charles Dyke, Charles Kaplan
By Bruce Rich
By Jennifer Persico
By Stephanie Henderson
Font Size: