Free Motion to Dismiss - District Court of Delaware - Delaware


File Size: 94.8 kB
Pages: 4
Date: July 3, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: Delaware
Category: District Court of Delaware
Author: unknown
Word Count: 725 Words, 4,432 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/40216/12.pdf

Download Motion to Dismiss - District Court of Delaware ( 94.8 kB)


Preview Motion to Dismiss - District Court of Delaware
Case 1:08-cv—OO268-G|\/IS Document 12 Filed 07/O3/2008 Page 1 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
TRW VEHICLE SAFETY SYSTEMS INC. and )
TRW AUTOMOTIVE GMBH, )
Plaintiffs, )
v. ) C.A. No. 08-268-GMS
TAKATA CORPORATION, TK HOLDINGS, INC., )
and TAKATA-PETRI AG, )
Defendants. )
DEFENDANT TK HOLDINGS INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS
UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. l2(b)(6) OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR A
MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. l2(e)
Defendant TK Holdings Inc. ("TK Holdings") hereby respectfully moves, pursuant to
Rule l2(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to dismiss the amended complaint on the
grounds that TRW Vehicle Safety Systems Inc. and TRW Automotive GmbH (collectively
"TRW") have (l) failed to satisfy even the liberal pleading requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 in
pleading its direct infringement claims and (2) has failed to adequately plead all required
elements for its induced infringement and willful infringement claims.
In the alternative, TK Holdings respectfully moves, pursuant to Rule l2(e) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, for an order directing TRW to provide a more definite statement of its
infringment allegations.
The basis for the requested relief is fully set forth in TK Holdings accompanying
memorandum of law. For the Cou1t’s convenience, a proposed form of order is attached hereto.
{OO227257;v1 }vvAs»—1_4se0s2e.1

Case 1 :08-cv—00268-GIVIS Document 12 Filed 07/03/2008 Page 2 of 4
ASHBY & GEDDES
/s/ T Wdny Geyer Lydon
Of Counsel: Steven J. Balick (1.D. #2114)
John G. Day (1.D. #2403)
Michael D. Kaniinski Tiffany Geyer Lydon (I.D. #3950)
Kenneth E. Krosin 500 Delaware Ave., 8th Floor
C. Edward Polk, Jr. P.O. Box 1150
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP Wilmington, DE 19899
Washington Harbour (3 02) 654-1888
3000 K Street, N.W., Suite 500 sbalicl<@ashby-geddes.co1n
Washington, D.C. 20007-5143 jday@ashby-geddescom
(202) 672-5300 [email protected]
Dated; July 3, 2008 Attorneys for Defendant TK Holdings, [nc.
{00227257;/1} 2

Case 1 :08-cv—OO268-GIVIS Document 12 Filed 07/O3/2008 Page 3 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
TRW VEHICLE SAFETY SYSTEMS INC. and )
TRW AUTOMOTIVE GMBH, )
Plaintiffs, 3
v. g C.A. No. 08-268-GMS
TAKATA CORPORATION, TK HOLDINGS, INC., g
and TAKATA-PETRI AG, )
Defendants. g
ORDER
This _ day of , 2008, Defendant TK Holdings Inc. having moved for
an Order dismissing Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. l2(b)(6) or, in the
alternative, for a more definite statement under Fed. R. Civ. P. l2(e), and the Court after
considering the motion having concluded that good grounds exist for the requested relief, now
therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s motion is granted and the Amended
Complaint is hereby dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. l2(b)(6)
or, in the alternative,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s motion is granted and Plaintiffs’ induced
and willful infringement claims are dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. l2(b)(6) and Plaintiffs
are hereby ordered to amend their infringement claims as follows:
1. For each defendant, Plaintiffs must identify the patent(s) that defendant is alleged
to infringe and identify whether the infringement is direct or indirect.
{oozzvzsnvi}

Case 1 :08-cv—OO268-GIVIS Document 12 Filed 07/O3/2008 Page 4 of 4
2. For each patent identified in part (l) that is alleged to be directly infringed by a
particular defendant, Plaintiffs shall identify at least one accused product that is
made, used, sold, offered for sale or imported by that particular defendant,
3. For each patent identified in part (l) that is alleged to be indirectly infringed by a
particular defendant, Plaintiffs shall identify the direct infringer and allege facts
supporting Plaintiffs’ induced infringement claims against that particular
defendant,
4. For each asserted patent that is alleged to have been willfully infringed, Plaintiffs
shall identify the date when each particular defendant is alleged to have known of
the asserted patent.
Chief Judge
{00227257,vl} 2

Case 1:08-cv-00268-GMS

Document 12

Filed 07/03/2008

Page 1 of 4

Case 1:08-cv-00268-GMS

Document 12

Filed 07/03/2008

Page 2 of 4

Case 1:08-cv-00268-GMS

Document 12

Filed 07/03/2008

Page 3 of 4

Case 1:08-cv-00268-GMS

Document 12

Filed 07/03/2008

Page 4 of 4