Mike Boyle and his son, Christopher, have asked the U.S. District Court of Oregon, Eugene division, to dismiss GlasWeld’s alleged patent infringement lawsuit, saying “the plaintiff has failed to provide a computation for each category of damages with appropriate documentation … as well as failing to disclose third-party insurance involvement in an effort to mislead the defendants and this court.”
“[A]s part of their burden of proof, plaintiffs are required to file a written disclosure with the defendants and the court encompassing ‘a computation of each category of damages’ and make available for ‘inspection and copying … on which each computation is based, including materials bearing on the nature and extent of injuries suffered,’” the Boyles write in court documents.
“Plaintiff’s legal obligations [are] not based upon defendants’ discovery requests but arises independently as a part of their evidentiary burden of proof. Without a written computation of specific damages with the underlying documentary foundation, the plaintiff’s case must fail,” they write.
But in her latest order, Judge Ann L. Aiken is asking the Boyles for some things. She writes, “Depositions are stayed until defendants provide plaintiffs with additional information set forth below. Specifically, on or before June 5, 2015, defendants shall:
1) Identify the documents and things defendants’ experts relied upon in forming their opinions;
2) Identify whether defendants’ experts have authored publications or previously testified in a lawsuit;
3) Provide a CV or resume for each of defendants’ experts; and
4) provide updated contact information, including addresses and telephone numbers, for defendants’ experts.”
She further orders, “Additionally, on or before June 5, 2015, defendants shall show cause why default should not be entered or sanctions should not be imposed against defendants for failing to comply with court orders, including the order to provide a report from the Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office.”
GlasWeld’s attorneys had not yet responded to the Boyles’ latest filing at press time.
GlasWeld filed the alleged patent infringement lawsuit against Mike Boyle in late 2012. The company later added Christopher Boyle as a defendant.
The patents referenced in the complaint are U.S. patent No. 5,670,180 (’180 patent), “Laminated Glass and Windshield Repair Device,” and U.S. patent No. 6,898,372 (’372), “Lamp System for Curing Resin in Glass,” issued to GlasWeld in September 1997 and May 2005, respectively. While Mike Boyle was named as an inventor on the ’372 patent, GlasWeld officials allege that he assigned all of his rights of ownership to the company and “has no right to practice the technology claimed in the ’372 patent.”