Kannuu Pty Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

Background

The supplied text is a letter from counsel for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., collectively called Samsung, in the patent case against Kannuu Pty Ltd. The letter asks the court for permission to file a motion requiring Kannuu to provide more detailed infringement contentions under Local Patent Rule 6.

Samsung said Kannuu served a two-and-a-half-page document called “Infringement Disclosures Under Local Patent Rule 6.” According to Samsung, the document listed patent claims and Samsung television and Blu-ray DVD player product lines, and accused products containing a “Predict Next Letter/Predict Next Character” feature. Samsung argued that the document did not identify how any particular requirement of any particular patent claim was present in any specific accused product, did not include claim charts, and did not show a pre-filing investigation.

Parties’ Positions

Samsung argued that Local Patent Rule 6 requires infringement contentions to give reasonable notice of the plaintiff’s infringement theories. It asked that Kannuu provide claim charts addressing each asserted claim and each accused product, explaining on a claim-by-claim and element-by-element basis how the accused products allegedly meet the patent requirements. Samsung also asked the court to recalculate the deadline for Samsung’s invalidity contentions and later patent-rule deadlines from the date Kannuu served adequate contentions.

The letter states that Samsung asked Kannuu to supplement its disclosures, provided supporting legal authority, and met and conferred with Kannuu. Samsung said Kannuu did not agree to supplement its contentions. The supplied text does not include a written response from Kannuu, apart from Samsung’s description of Kannuu’s position.

Court Action

Judge Edgardo Ramos directed Kannuu to respond by December 3, 2020, and endorsed that direction as ordered. The supplied text does not show that Judge Ramos granted or denied Samsung’s request for leave to file a motion, ruled on whether Kannuu’s disclosures complied with Local Patent Rule 6, ordered Kannuu to provide claim charts, or recalculated any deadlines. Because the text shows a direction for a response rather than a ruling on the requested relief, this summary classifies it as other.