December 27, 2016 — On December 22, 2016, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California granted in part and denied in part Defendants’ motion to dismiss patent and copyright infringement claims asserted by Plaintiffs DJO Global, Inc., DJO Consumer, LLC, and DJO, LLC. Defendants in this case are Eric Glader, Anneke Marvin, Powerdot, Inc., and Smartmissimo Technologies PTE Ltd. (“Defendants”). The Court granted the motion to dismiss DJO Global, Inc. and DJO Consumer, LLC as co-plaintiffs from the patent and copyright infringement claims, leaving DJO, LLC as the sole plaintiff for the claims, because only DJO, LLC possesses all rights to the asserted patents and copyright registrations. The Court then denied the motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s direct patent infringement claims for failure to state a claim. According to the Court, DJO, LLC “has plausibly pled claims of direct infringement of the four asserted patents” because contrary to the Defendants’ assertions, the complaint provides sufficient descriptions of the accused product so that “it can be reasonably inferred” that certain limitations of the asserted claims are present.
The Court also denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ other claims, which are based on common law, Defend Trade Secret Act, and California Unfair Competition Law.
The patents-at-issue are U.S. Patent Nos. 8,452,409, 8,977,366, 9,220,896, 9,242,091, all entitled, “Systems and Methods for Therapeutic Electrical Stimulation.” The case is captioned DJO Global, Inc. v. Glader, 3-16-cv-02208.
By: Chika Seidel