JDS Technologies, Inc. v. Avigilon USA Corp., Case No. 15-10385, 2015 WL 3603525 (E.D. Mich. June 5, 2015) U.S. District Judge Avern Cohn denied Avigilon’s motion to dismiss for failing to adequately plead allegations of indirect infringement and willful infringement. Avigilon argued that the complaint was inadequate because it did not properly claim that Avigilon had the requisite knowledge of the asserted patents before the complaint was filed. The court, relying on several allegations from the complaint, rejected Avigilon’s arguments. For indirect infringement, the court emphasized that the plaintiff had alleged that: (1) Avigilon and plaintiff are competitors, and (2) Avigilon knew about the plaintiff’s patents and technology from the plaintiff’s marketing, appearance at trade shows, and prior publicized litigation involving the patented technology. The court concluded “this is all that is required to plead a claim for indirect or induced…
↧