Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

ABS Global, Inc. v. Inguran, LLC

United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin

April 24, 2017

ABS GLOBAL, INC., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant,
v.
INGURAN, LLC, d/b/a Sexing Technologies, Defendant/Counterclaimant, and XY, LLC, Intervening Defendant/Counterclaimant,
v.
GENUS PLC, Counterclaim Defendant.

          AMENDED JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

          William M. Conley, Judge

         This action came before the court and a jury with District Judge William M. Conley presiding. Partial judgment was granted by the court. The issues have been tried and a decision has been rendered.

         IT IS ORDERED that:

         1. Judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff/counterclaim defendant ABS Global, Inc. ("ABS") and counterclaim defendant Genus pic ("Genus"), and against defendant/counterclaimant Inguran, LLC d/b/a Sexing Technologies ("ST"), granting summary judgment and dismissing ST's claims of fraudulent inducement, promissory estoppel, and infringement of claims 3, 4, 6, 9, and 10 of U.S. Patent No. 8, 206, 987 (the "'987 patent").

         2. Judgment is entered in favor of ABS and against ST on ABS's claim under § 2 of the Sherman Act, and granting injunctive relief under § 16 of the Clayton Act according to the permanent injunction ordered below.

         3. Judgment is entered in favor of ST and against ABS on ABS's claim for damages under § 4 of the Clayton Act.

         4. Judgment is entered in favor of ABS and against ST on ABS's claim under the Wisconsin common law of unfair competition, but awarding no monetary damages.

         5. Judgment is entered declaring that ABS's GSS technology is a "technology for sorting mammalian semen into X (female) chromosome bearing and Y (male) chromosome bearing sperm populations" under Section 18(a) of the parties' 2012 Semen Sorting Agreement ("2012 Agreement").

         6. Judgment is entered declaring that the research and development of ABS's GSS technology was permitted by Section 18(b) of the 2012 Agreement.

         7. Judgment is entered declaring that the liquidated damages provision in Section 4(b) of the 2012 Agreement is unenforceable under Texas law.

         8. Judgment is entered preserving the validity of Section 4(a) of the 2012 Agreement under Texas law by reforming Sections 4(b) and 4(c) of the 2012 Agreement to preclude any recoveries for unpurchased straws, beyond the liquidated damages set forth in Section 4(a).

         9. Judgment is entered declaring that the restrictions set forth in Section 18 of the 2012 Agreement are unreasonable and unenforceable as written under Texas law, and reforming Section 18 in accordance with the permanent injunction ordered below.

         10. Judgment is entered in favor of ST and against ABS and Genus jointly and severally in the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500, 000) in past damages, together with prejudgment interest in the amount of Fifty-Nine Thousand, Sixty-Five Dollars ($59, 065), on ST's claim of literal infringement of claims 1, 4, 13, 40, 41, 42, 44, and 46 of U.S. Patent No. 8, 198, 092 (the "'092 patent").

         11. Judgment is entered in favor of ST and against ABS and Genus on ABS and Genus's claims of invalidity of claims 1, 4, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.