Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :05-cv—00160-KAJ—I\/IPT Document 192 Filed 10/05/2006 Page 1 of 1
MORRÂ¥S, NICHOLS, ARSHT gt TUNNELL LLP
E20} Nonern Mnannrr Srrnnm
P.O. Box 1347
Wrrmxnoron, Dnmwaaa l9899~l347
302 658 9200
302 658 3989 Fax
Domino E. Rem
202 sei 9219
202 &25 3001 not
[email protected] Qctobey 55
BY E-FILING AND
HAND DELIVERY
The Honorable Kent A. Jordan
United States District Court
for the District of Delaware
844 North King Street
Wilmington, Delaware 19801
Re: Novozymes A/S v. Gerzencor International, Im:. et cu'.
CA. No. 05460 (KA];
Dear Judge Jordan:
We write to briefiy respond to the letter sent yesterday by Plaintiff Novozyrnes
A/S regarding the recent order granting a permanent injunction in Smith & Nephew, Inc. v.
Sym/tes (USA.), No. 022873 (W.D. Tenn. Sept. 28, 2006). Far from being "similar to the
captioned matter," Smith, Eike each ofthe patent cases which has granted an injunction following
eBay Inc. v. Merc/E"xchange LL. C., t26 S. Ct. 1837 (2006), involved a patentee who exptoited its
own patent. Unlike Novozyrnes Af S, the patentee in Smith, practiced the patent at issue, licensed
it for profit (even to competitors), and directly competed in the reievant market.
We also wish to draw the Court’s attention to the fact that on October 3rd the
Federal Circuit issued an order staying the permanent injunction in a case which Novozymes had
reiied upon in its Reply Brief. See Ti V0 Inc. v. Ec/10Smr Commzms. Corp., No. 20064574, slip
op. (Fed. Cir. Oct. 3, 2006) (attached as Exhibit A).
We stand ready to discuss these issues with the Court if it would be assistance.
Respectfully yours,
/s/ Donald E. Reid
Donatd Reid
DER/amr