LAUTZENHISER TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. SUNRISE MEDICAL HHG, INC. et al
Plaintiff: LAUTZENHISER TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
Defendant: SUNRISE MEDICAL HHG, INC. and SUNRISE MEDICAL INC.
Case Number: 4:2007cv00084
Filed: June 18, 2007
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: New Albany Office
County: Hamilton
Presiding Judge: David Frank Hamilton
Presiding Judge: William G. Hussmann
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35 U.S.C. ยง 145 Patent Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
November 8, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 249 ENTRY ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - The Court GRANTS 154 PG and Sunrise's Motion for Summary Judgment as to the laches defense on the '899 and '906 patents. The Court DENIES 154 PG and Sunrise's Motion for Summary J udgment as to the laches defense on the '807, '624 and '600 patents. The Court also DENIES 158 LT's Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to the availability of the laches defense for Sunrise wheelchairs that use Delphi controllers. As to the equitable estoppel defense, the Court DENIES 154 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment for all patents-in-suit. The Court DENIES 158 LT's Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to the availability of the equitable estoppel defense for Sunrise wheelchairs which use Delphi controllers. The Court GRANTS 158 LT's Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to the availability of the equitable estoppel defense for Delphi itself. Thus, Delphi ca nnot prevail under a theory of equitable estoppel. Finally, as to the implied license defense, the Court DENIES the parties' respective Motions for Summary Judgment ( 154 and 158 ). See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 11/8/2010. (LBT)
August 27, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 238 ORDER ADOPTING 234 MAGISTRATE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - 209 Motion to Intervene filed by JAMES KNAPP is DENIED. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/27/2010.(LBT)
August 9, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 234 MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 209 MOTION to Intervene filed by JAMES KNAPP and IVA JEAN KNAPP. The Magistrate Judge hereby RECOMMENDS that the Motion for Leave to Intervene as Defendants be denied. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Hussmann, Jr on 8/9/2010.(JLM)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: LAUTZENHISER TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. SUNRISE MEDICAL HHG, INC. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: LAUTZENHISER TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
Represented By: James C. Eaves, Jr.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: SUNRISE MEDICAL HHG, INC.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: SUNRISE MEDICAL INC.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?