Matthew Berntsen

Sep 24, 2024 | finnegan.com | Lionel M. Lavenue |Michael McLaughlin |Matthew Berntsen

A recent dismissal in a declaratory judgment action filed by BMW of North America and Bayerische Motoren Werke marked the conclusion ofBMW Group’s long-fought battle against Arigna Technology (Arigna). The dispute spanned multiple venues, including US district courts, the USInternational Trade Commission(ITC), the Federal Circuit, and theUS Patent and Trademark Office(USPTO).

Jul 31, 2024 | finnegan.com | Matthew Berntsen |Cory Bell

This is part of a series of articles discussing recent orders of interest issued in patent cases by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. In DS Advanced Enterprises v. Ledvance LLC, No. 24-cv-11155, Magistrate Judge Levenson denied Plaintiff’s request to waive the Local Rules’ requirement of local counsel and denied without prejudice the application to admit its out-of-state attorney pro hac vice.

Dec 29, 2023 | mondaq.com | Dynamic Drinkware |Matthew Berntsen |Cory Bell

In Lu v. Hyper Bicycles, Inc., No. 1:20-cv-1173923, Judge Gorton granted in part Hyper's motion for attorneys' fees. First, the Court ruled that the case was exceptional, finding that Lu failed to meaningfully litigate the case, which ultimately rendered his positions frivolous.

Dec 19, 2023 | finnegan.com | Matthew Berntsen |Cory Bell

This is part of a series of articles discussing recent orders of interest issued in patent cases by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. In Lu v. Hyper Bicycles, Inc., No. 1:20-cv-1173923, Judge Gorton granted in part Hyper’s motion for attorneys’ fees. First, the Court ruled that the case was exceptional, finding that Lu failed to meaningfully litigate the case, which ultimately rendered his positions frivolous.

Dec 5, 2023 | mondaq.com | Matthew Berntsen

This is part of a series of articles discussing recent orders of interest issued in patent cases by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. In IOT Innovations LLC v. Savant Systems, Inc., No. 1:23-cv-12528, Judge Stearns issued two Orders four days apart. The first Order noted that under Local Rule 40.1(g)(1), cases are related only if "one or more of the following similarities exist: i. the cases involve the same or substantially similar issues of fact; ii.