This case arises out of a bouncy-house franchise. In my experience, kids liked the Star Trek theme for the party more than they did the bouncy house.
This case deals with whether the plaintiff had sufficient rights when it sued the defendant for patent infringement.
This order gets into the weeds on copyright in this case involving a comic book storyline alleged to be copied by “The Umbrella Academy”.
Okay, the substance of this MTD on PJ, IV & 1404 to WDTX is interesting, but the formatting’s worth a look as well.
Judge Albright granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s infringement claims with prejudice.
This motion to dismiss raised issues regarding claim splitting and improper venue which were novel, and issues regarding indirect and willful infringement which were not.
The issue in this SDTX case was whether the court would dismiss the IC and induced infringement claims as not plausible.
An interesting procedural background to this case, involving a declaratory action in New Jersey which was transferred to Waco.
Judge Albright denied this motion directed at the plaintiff’s claims involving pre-suit knowledge.
Judge Albright denied the motion, finding that venue was sufficiently alleged, and reiterating that “a Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss is a procedurally awkward place for a court to resolve a patent’s § 101 eligibility.”