Edge Systems Corporation et al v. Bio-Therapeutic Inc
Filing
26
STIPULATED PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE; ORDER by Judge John F. Walter. Pursuant to 35 USC 283, as of the date of this Court's Order, BT, and any of its employees, agents, representatives, subsidiaries, directors, principals , officers, successors, and assigns, and all others acting in concert or participation with BT who receive actual notice of this Order, SHALL BE PERMANENTLY ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED. BT has waived any appeal of the Stipulated Permanent Injunction. Eac h of the parties SHALL BEAR ITS OWN COSTS AND ITS OWN ATTORNEYS' FEES. This is a final judgment. Subject to this Court's limited retention of jurisdiction as set forth above, all claims and counterclaims filed in this action SHALL BE DISMISSED from this action WITH PREJUDICE. Having addressed each of the claims and counterclaims in thisaction, this case SHALL BE CLOSED. (MD JS-6. Case Terminated.) (jp)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Brenton R. Babcock (SBN 162,120)
bbabcock@kmob.com
Kent Shum (SBN 259,189)
kent.shum@kmob.com
KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
2040 Main Street
Fourteenth Floor
Irvine, CA 92614
Phone: (949) 760-0404
Facsimile: (949) 760-9502
JS-6
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
EDGE SYSTEMS CORPORATION and
AXIA MEDSCIENCES, LLC
Michael J. Song (SBN 243675)
MSong@perkinscoie.com
PERKINS COIE LLP
1888 Century Park East, Suite 1700
Los Angeles, CA 90067-1721
Telephone: (310) 788-9900
Facsimile: (310) 788-3399
Attorneys for Defendants
BIO-THERAPEUTIC, INC. and
MICRO CURRENT TECHNOLOGY, INC.
14
15
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
WESTERN DIVISION
18
19
20
EDGE SYSTEMS CORPORATION, a
California corporation, and AXIA
MEDSCIENCES, LLC,, a Delaware
limited liability company,
Plaintiffs,
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
v.
BIO-THERAPEUTIC, INC., a
Washington corporation, and MICRO
CURRENT TECHNOLOGY, INC., a
Washington corporation,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No.
2:11-cv-04993-JFW-(AGRx)
STIPULATED PERMANENT
INJUNCTION AND DISMISSAL
WITH PREJUDICE; ORDER
THEREON
1
This case having come before this Court, and it being represented to the
2
Court that Plaintiffs and Counterclaim Defendants Edge Systems Corporation
3
and Axia MedSciences, LLC (collectively “Edge”) and Defendants and
4
Counterclaimants Micro Current Technology, Inc., d/b/a Bio-Therapeutic, Inc.
5
(“BT”) have compromised and settled the matters in dispute, IT IS HEREBY
6
ORDERED, ADJUDICATED and DECREED as follows:
7
PERMANENT INJUNCTION ORDER
Having considered the STIPULATION of the parties, and for good cause
8
9
shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1.
10
11
This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter
in this case.
12
2.
Venue is proper in this judicial district.
13
3.
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283, as of the date of this Court’s Order,
14
BT, and any of its employees, agents, representatives, subsidiaries, directors,
15
principals, officers, successors, and assigns, and all others acting in concert or
16
participation with BT who receive actual notice of this Order, SHALL BE
17
PERMANENTLY ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from all importing,
18
manufacturing, marketing, advertising, using, offering for sale, and selling of all
19
“wet” microdermabrasion machines and machine-specific accessories in the
20
United States (with the following exception to the aforementioned “offering for
21
sale”:
22
Seattle, Washington (i.e., phone calls and paperwork), but the products offered
23
for sale by BT shall be manufactured outside the United States, shall be
24
delivered to the end customer outside the United States, and shall never enter
25
the United States), which includes the following products:
26
BT is permitted to coordinate foreign-to-foreign transactions from
a.
The accused “wet” microdermabrasion machines and machine-
27
specific accessories, including: the accused BT Bio-Hydroderm
28
microdermabrasion machine, the accused BT Bio-Hydrotip
-1-
1
microdermabrasion machine, and the accused BT AQUAFUSE
2
microdermabrasion fluid (and any other consumable) in containers
3
designed to fit such machines;
4
b.
Any “wet” microdermabrasion machine (i.e., a machine that has
5
the capability of both delivering a fluid and using an abrasive tip,
6
either simultaneously or sequentially) that is not colorably different
7
from the accused “wet” microdermabrasion machines with respect
8
to the claims of the asserted patents;
9
c.
Any microdermabrasion machine that has the capability of both
10
delivering a fluid and using an abrasive tip, either simultaneously
11
or sequentially;
12
d.
The phrase “microdermabrasion machines and machine-specific
13
accessories” as used herein includes all tips, fluids, and other
14
consumables used in conjunction with a “wet” microdermabrasion
15
system that are specifically adapted for use with such a system,
16
including BT’s accused “wet” microdermabrasion systems and
17
Edge’s “wet” microdermabrasion systems, but does not include any
18
tips, fluids, or other consumables that are designed generically such
19
that they could be used with a “dry” microdermabrasion machine
20
(as defined below) or fluids that are used topically and applied by
21
hand; and
22
e.
A
“dry”
microdermabrasion
machine
is
defined
as
any
23
microdermabrasion machine that uses crystals or an abrasive tip but
24
(a) does not deliver a fluid and (b) cannot be adapted for use with a
25
fluid without significant modification.
26
4.
This Court SHALL RETAIN JURISDICTION of this action to the
27
extent necessary to ensure full compliance with all obligations imposed by the
28
Permanent Injunction Order, including the enforcement this Stipulated
-2-
1
Permanent Injunction by way of contempt or otherwise. The obligations of the
2
parties, as set forth in the Stipulated Permanent Injunction SHALL BE
3
ENFORCED, if necessary, exclusively by this Court.
5.
4
If in the future either party files suit against the other party vis-à-
5
vis the Asserted Patents, the filing party SHALL FILE SUIT in the United
6
States District Court for the Central District of California and, pursuant to Local
7
Rule 4.3.1, simultaneously file a Notice of Related Case with the Court
8
identifying this dismissed action.
9
6.
BT has waived any appeal of the Stipulated Permanent Injunction.
10
7.
Each of the parties SHALL BEAR ITS OWN COSTS AND ITS
11
OWN ATTORNEYS' FEES.
8.
12
This is a final judgment. Subject to this Court's limited retention of
13
jurisdiction as set forth above, all claims and counterclaims filed in this action
14
SHALL BE DISMISSED from this action WITH PREJUDICE.
9.
15
16
Having addressed each of the claims and counterclaims in this
action, this case SHALL BE CLOSED.
17
18
19
Dated: October 12, 2011
DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
20
21
11820536
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?