Toshiba Corporation v. Imation Corp. et al.

Filing 499

JUDGMENT entered partially in favor of Plaintiff Toshiba Corporation and partially in favor of defendant. (SLC / PAO). (rep)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
TOSHIBA CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

v.

Case No. 09-cv-305-slc

IMATION CORP.; MOSER BAER INDIA LTD.;
GL YPHICS MEDIA, INC.; CMC MAGNETICS
CORP.; HOTAN CORP.; KHYPERMEDIA
CORP.; RITEK CORP.; and ADVANCED
MEDIA, INC.,
Defendants.
This action came before the court and a jury with Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker
presiding. The issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict.
IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment is entered:
1.

In favor of plaintiff Toshiba Corporation and against defendants Imation Corp., Moser Baer India
Ltd., Ritek Corp., and CMC Magnetics Corp. on plaintiff's claims that defendants induced
infringement of Claim 1 ofU.S. Patent No. 5,831,966 and Claims 1, 2, and 4 ofU.S. Patent No.
5,892,751;

2.

In favor of defendants Imation Corp., Moser Baer India Ltd., Ritek Corp., CMC Magnetics
Corp., Advanced Media Inc. and Rotan Corp. and against plaintiff on plaintiff's claim that
defendants directly infringed Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 5,831 ,966;

3.

In favor of defendants Advanced Media Inc. and Rotan Corp. and against plaintiff on plaintiff's
claims that defendants induced infringement of Claim 1 ofU.S. Patent No. 5,831,966 and Claims
1, 2, and 4 ofU.S. Patent No. 5,892,751;

4.

Finding that defendants Imation Corp., Moser Baer India Ltd., Ritek Corp., and CMC Magnetics
Corp. were notified of their infringement of the '966 patent and '751 patent prior to the filing of
this lawsuit;

5.

In favor of plaintiff and against all defendants on defendants' counterclaim that the '966 patent is
invalid as anticipated by prior art;

6.

In favor of all defendants and against plaintiff on the issue of proof of damages, granting in part
defendants' Daubert Motion (dkt. 354) and Renewed Daubert Motion (dkt. 440) concerning
evidence of a reasonable royalty;

7.

Dismissing with prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4l(a) plaintiff's claim that defendants willfully
infringed the '966 and the '751 patents;

Judgment in a Civil Case

Page2

8.

Dismissing with prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a) defendants' counterclaims that the '966
patent and '751 patent are invalid because they are obvious in light of prior art and that the '751
patent is invalid as anticipated by prior art; and

9.

Dismissing with prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a) defendants Khypermedia Corp. and
Glyphics Media, Inc. pursuant to the stipulation of the parties.

J...
Approved_as_;o f~ of April, 2013.

L~r,

Stephen
Magistrate Judge

.