CellSpin’s Litigation Strategy Dinged Again
Northern District of California Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers has granted summary judgment of noninfringement to a group of defendants sued by CellSpin Soft, Inc. back in 2017: Alphabet (Fitbit), Fossil, Garmin, Nike, Nikon, and Under Armour. The court ruled that the inventor-controlled plaintiff failed to “marshal the evidence necessary to defeat the defendants’ summary judgment motions”, suggesting that the failure is “perhaps a consequence of Cellspin’s decision to litigate this case with numerous defendants and accused products”. This grant is not CellSpin’s first summary judgment pickle, nor is this speculation the court’s first comment on the plaintiff’s litigation strategy—Judge Gonzalez Rogers having earlier criticized CellSpin for not having “filed a ‘test case’ before asserting its patents here” because those patents (according to the court) were “manifestly directed to an abstract idea”.
This content requires a subscription to view
- Over 7,000 news articles covering new patent cases, key policy decisions, and USPTO assignments
- Advanced custom alerts for campaigns and entities
- Proprietary litigation timelines
- Full access to Federal Circuit, PTAB, and ITC dockets
- Judge, venue, and law firm analytics