Plaintiff Freight Tracking Technologies recently suffered a setback in its patent infringement suit against APM Terminals North America, Inc. In its suit, Freight Tracking alleges that two "automated" ports operated by APM—one in Portsmouth, Virginia, and the other, "Pier 400," near Los Angeles, California—practice the GPS-enabled container tracking methods of two of its patents. Freight Tracking recently moved to compel production of technical specification documents related to Pier 400, owned and operated by a wholly-owned subsidiary of APM, arguing that APM is liable for the subsidiary's infringement.
Magistrate Judge Douglas E. Miller denied Freight Tracking's effort to secure the subsidiary's documents, citing Federal Circuit authority holding that a parent corporation may only be liable as a direct infringer under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) for infringement by its subsidiary where "the evidence reveals circumstances justifying disregard of the status of [the subsidiaries and the parent] as distinct, separate corporations." Order at 2-3, Freight Tracking Techs., LLC v. Va. Int'l Gateway, Inc., No. 2:13cv708 (E.D. Va. Nov. 24, 2014), ECF No. 105 (quoting A. Stucki Co. v. Worthington Indus., Inc., 849 F.2d 593, 596 (Fed. Cir. 1988)) (order available here). Because Freight Tracking's Complaint was "devoid of any allegations that could give rise to piercing the corporate veil," id. at 3, Magistrate Judge Miller found that it was inappropriate to compel APM to produce documents related to Pier 400.
All was not lost, however, for Freight Tracking. Magistrate Judge Miller granted Freight Tracking's motion to compel with respect to documents relating to the efficiency of APM's Portsmouth terminal and the consolidated financial statements of other terminals, reasoning that these categories of documents would "aid [Freight Tracking] in discovering evidence admissible to prove their damages for a reasonable royalty." Id. at 2 (citing Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. U.S. Plywood Corp., 318 F. Supp. 1116, 1119-20 (S.D.N.Y. 1970)).
Trial in the Freight Tracking case is scheduled to begin in May 2015.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
