Litigation Details for Carnegie Institution of Washington v. Pure Grown Diamonds, Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2020)

Carnegie Institution of Washington v. Pure Grown Diamonds, Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2020)

Docket		Date Filed	2020-01-08
Court	District Court, S.D. New York	Date Terminated	2020-11-19
Cause	35:271 Patent Infringement	Assigned To	Jed Saul Rakoff
Jury Demand	Plaintiff	Referred To
Parties	CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON; IIA TECHNOLOGIES PTE. LTD; M7D CORPORATION; PURE GROWN DIAMONDS, INC.
Patents	10,010,498; 10,011,857; 10,023,854; 10,029,011; 10,036,054; 10,065,919; 10,071,992; 10,076,523; 10,076,557; 10,076,573; 10,092,557; 10,092,569; 10,118,901; 10,138,288; 10,172,380; 10,189,818; 10,206,939; 10,256,050; 10,287,362; 10,336,809; 10,336,815; 10,336,827; 10,420,775; 10,434,039; 10,434,147; 10,450,613; 10,479,686; 10,544,200; 10,557,175; 10,557,862; 10,563,189; 10,563,271; 10,570,202; 10,576,111; 10,576,136; 10,613,085; 10,613,091; 10,613,092; 10,613,101; 6,004,596; 6,010,737; 6,171,575; 6,172,031; 6,566,135; 6,735,998; 6,737,006; 6,858,409; 6,858,584; 6,858,618; 6,863,185; 6,869,939; 6,900,175; 6,927,192; 6,992,070; 6,992,085; 6,992,102; 6,992,110; 7,014,610; 7,037,889; 7,087,613; 7,090,618; 7,101,576; 7,132,408; 7,135,618; 7,147,067; 7,192,612; 7,217,569; 7,217,858; 7,288,408; 7,393,674; 7,408,024; 7,415,858; 7,452,867; 7,517,900; 7,537,009; 7,544,370; 7,544,860; 7,544,863; 7,550,153; 7,550,575; 7,557,266; 7,563,801; 7,563,871; 7,566,690; 7,566,714; 7,566,816; 7,576,053; 7,610,097; 7,662,125; 7,662,141; 7,662,573; 7,662,858; 7,674,774; 7,678,399; 7,714,185; 7,745,571; 7,754,271; 7,811,185; 7,811,618; 7,818,100; 7,838,009; 7,838,027; 7,838,498; 7,858,087; 7,858,118; 7,858,122; 7,858,139; 7,858,662; 7,858,845; 7,883,714; 7,918,823; 7,932,009; 7,939,086; 7,939,714; 7,976,590; 7,981,618; 7,989,412; 8,003,353; 8,017,557; 8,017,839; 8,030,523; 8,048,854; 8,057,811; 8,057,818; 8,057,998; 8,071,569; 8,071,613; 8,075,919; 8,101,429; 8,101,818; 8,105,613; 8,124,573; 8,137,992; 8,206,735; 8,208,189; 8,282,909; 8,318,202; 8,362,288; 8,372,995; 8,399,015; 8,426,362; 8,439,864; 8,551,773; 8,556,864; 8,563,690; 8,569,061; 8,569,072; 8,569,573; 8,575,434; 8,618,049; 8,618,076; 8,618,081; 8,618,123; 8,618,130; 8,618,135; 8,618,141; 8,618,289; 8,662,130; 8,692,006; 8,692,008; 8,703,379; 8,735,076; 8,735,428; 8,748,413; 8,754,072; 8,754,078; 8,754,090; 8,754,091; 8,754,096; 8,754,123; 8,808,786; 8,809,271; 8,809,615; 8,858,939; 8,858,987; 8,859,610; 8,883,775; 8,889,099; 8,889,109; 8,889,113; 8,889,115; 8,889,136; 8,889,932; 8,892,681; 8,900,333; 8,900,566; 8,900,576; 8,900,618; 8,901,086; 8,933,191; 8,998,754; 9,000,002; 9,005,613; 9,011,906; 9,011,949; 9,012,418; 9,060,708; 9,060,939; 9,060,992; 9,066,992; 9,067,992; 9,073,858; 9,089,570; 9,089,618; 9,096,569; 9,102,573; 9,109,992; 9,125,889; 9,125,939; 9,161,992; 9,261,522; 9,327,175; 9,370,557; 9,399,023; 9,408,858; 9,408,973; 9,415,102; 9,415,136; 9,446,013; 9,446,057; 9,446,998; 9,511,031; 9,523,099; 9,566,271; 9,566,289; 9,573,818; 9,573,921; 9,580,739; 9,598,707; 9,662,415; 9,662,450; 9,700,050; 9,708,618; 9,714,283; 9,737,399; 9,738,690; 9,739,786; 9,808,444; 9,808,517; 9,815,827; 9,839,688; 9,839,692; 9,889,102; 9,889,118; 9,889,138; 9,901,113; 9,902,714; 9,902,745; 9,909,047; 9,913,902; 9,918,654; 9,918,939; 9,919,048; 9,919,050
Attorneys	Amy Simpson; Jonathon Brugh Lower; Joseph Preston Long; Matthew Joseph Moffa; Parmanand K. Sharma; Terrence Wikberg; William Paul Deni , Jr.,
Firms	Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner LLP-DC; Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett and Dunner; Perkins Coie LLP
Link to Docket	External link to docket

Biologic Drugs cited in Carnegie Institution of Washington v. Pure Grown Diamonds, Inc.

Details for Carnegie Institution of Washington v. Pure Grown Diamonds, Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2020)

Date Filed	Document No.	Description	Snippet	Link To Document
2020-10-16	100		10:29:11 7 methane, and then that would give rise… Exhibit 11 078 Provisional Patent Application ... Page 127 … Exhibit 12 US Patent 6,858,078 B2 ............... Page 132 6 … Exhibit 13 Patent US 2009/0297429 ............... Page 171 7 … Exhibit 101 US Patent 5,628,824 .................. Page 138 8	External link to document
2020-11-08	119		questions about that section. 10:36:54 24 size; so I think that's where … Exhibit 11 078 Provisional Patent Application ... Page 127 … Exhibit 12 US Patent 6,858,078 B2 ............... Page 132 6 … Exhibit 13 Patent US 2009/0297429 ............... Page 171 7 … Exhibit 101 US Patent 5,628,824 .................. Page 138 8	External link to document
2020-03-30	29	Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion	Mail’s patents themselves.”); Automated Tracking Solutions, LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., 723 F. App’x 989, 995…........16 Exhibit J at 1:27-36 U.S. Patent No. 5,449,412 to Pinneo ..............................… and ’189 Patents because Devi Shankar Misra is “a named inventor on at least seven patents relating …Exhibit A at 1:20-22, 4:57-5:30, 6:40-50, 7:8-10, Fig. 1 U.S. Patent No. 4,124,690 to Strong et al. .....…2200ºC @ 7 GPa), Fig. 1 (showing HPHT conditions). To suggest this difference is patentable would be,	External link to document
2020-04-13	36	Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion	” infringement. 189 F. Supp. 3d at 775. And L-7 was a non-patent case where the only specific allegation…diamond stable phase. ECF No.1-2 (“the ’189 patent”) at 4:10–14. C. Procedural Background …36 Filed 04/13/20 Page 10 of 32 annealing processes claimed in the ’189 patent, id. ¶¶ 81–86, 118–21… also patent-eligible. As the Patent and Trademark Office has explained in its Manual of Patent Examining…Materials, Inc. v. Mitsubishi Materials Silicon Corp., 420 F.3d 1369 (Fed Cir. 2005)........................	External link to document