Irwin Industrial Tool Co. d/b/a Lenox (NC, but with operations in East Longmeadow, MA) has sued Bibow Indus., Inc. (NY) and its owner for declaratory judgment of validity of three Lenox patents (7,373,947; 7,415,988; and 7,195,031) directed to storage systems / protective devices for air acetylene gas tanks and declaratory judgment of non-infringement of two Bibow patents (6,976,502 and 7,588,276).
The complaint arises from what it complains are Bibow’s attempts to “extract money from Lenox for years.” A previous suit between the two companies, originally filed by Bibow in Florida but transferred to Mass. was resolved in Lenox’s favor on summary judgment when the court ruled that Lenox did not infringe Bibow’s patents. (D. Mass. 06-30136-MAP.) Since that case, Lenox alleges that Bibow refuses to leave Lenox alone and has repeatedly pestered Lenox and its parent company, asserting that Lenox’s patents are based on his work (making him an owner of their patents), and even applying to work at Lenox(!).
Lenox seeks a declaration that Bibow is not an inventor of their patents as well as a declaration that Lenox does not infringe Bibow’s patents.
One side thought.
The complaint cites Bibow’s attempts at licensing discussions which state “I would really like to work with Lenox... -- me, wanting to be a uniter NOT a divider. Truthfully, I do not want to go down the alternative route.” Even if Bibow was as relentless as the complaint states, if you take him at his word, don’t statements like this tend to weigh against exercising jurisdiction? If this guy really is acting solo, and has already lost in court once, maybe there really is no actual case or controversy. Maybe it’s just a guy who won’t give up on his licensing attempts but is never really going to go to court again. If so, then what?
Irwin Industrial Tool Co. v. Bibow Indus., Inc., 11-30023-KPN (D. Mass. Jan. 27, 2011)
Comments