![]() ![]() Even further, the assignment agreement provides that "individuals John K. Further, the assignment agreement provides that Clark and Peirano were each assigned "in accordance with the respective percentage ownership set forth above, the entire right, title and interest. Specifically, the assignment agreement provides that both Clark and Peirano each have "a fifty percent (50%) ownership interest in and to the rights of. ![]() Patent & Trademark Office also confirm that John Peirano ("Peirano") owns an interest in the patent-in-suit. ![]() The assignment agreements filed at the U.S. Song In Support Of Motion To Dismiss ("Song Decl."), Ex. 28-12 at 3-4.Īaron Clark, then jointly to Aaron Clark and John Peirano." See Declaration of Michael J. 28 at ¶¶ 29, 39 (First Amended Complaint) Plaintiff also attached the "assignment of license" as Exhibit K to the original Complaint and First Amended Complaint. Plaintiff made similar allegations in its original Complaint and First Amended Complaint. The memorandum of law in support of the previously-filed motion to dismiss and the instant memorandum of law total less than 20 pages combined, in accordance with S.D. 12(b)(6), which remains pending before this Court. 15, Plaintiff stated that "the patent was assigned to Inotrend, then toĭefendants have previously filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. For example, in response to JAKKS' Interrogatory No. 45-14 at 2-3.3 In fact, Plaintiff's subsequent discovery responses demonstrate that his allegations regarding sole ownership of the patent-in-suit are false. at ¶ 38 (emphasis supplied).2 In contrast, the "assignment of license," attached as Exhibit M to the Second Amended Complaint shows that the patent-in-suit was assigned to Plaintiff Aaron Clark and John Peirano. Plaintiff also alleged that "Plaintiff has been and still is the rightful owner of all rights, title and interest to the 272 Patent." Id. In support of Plaintiff's claim for patent infringement, Plaintiff alleged that "Plaintiff is the sole owner of the 272 Patent." Id. FACTS In his Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiff's first claim for relief alleges infringement of U.S. (collectively "Defendants") respectfully submit this memorandum of law in support of their Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Aaron Clark's ("Clark" or "Plaintiff") claim for patent infringement in the above entitled action pursuant to Fed. MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS Defendants JAKKS Pacific, Inc., Play Along Toys and Toys "R" Us, Inc. Song (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Foley & Lardner LLP 555 South Flower St., Suite 3500 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Tel: (213) 972-4500 Attorneys for JAKKS Pacific, Inc., Play Along Toys, KB Toys, and Toys "R" Us, Inc. Kinsel (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Michael J. Respectfully submitted, By: /s/ Michael C. The basis for this motion is set forth in the accompanying Memorandum of Law. respectfully submit this motion seeking an Order dismissing Plaintiff's first claim for relief for patent infringement asserted against them in the above-entitled action pursuant to Rule 12(b)(7) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO JOIN A NECESSARY AND INDISPENSABLE PARTY (FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 12(b)(7))ĭefendants JAKKS Pacific, Inc., Play Along Toys, and Toys "R" Us, Inc. PLAY ALONG TOYS KB TOYS TOYS `R US BABYUNIVERSE, INC. Holschuh THE WALT DISNEY COMPANY JAKKS PACIFIC, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISIONĭistrict Judge John D. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |