FUJIFILM Sonosite, Inc. v. Butterfly Network, Inc.
Summary
FUJIFILM Sonosite sued Butterfly Network and related FUJIFILM entities over patent infringement. The case involves a patent dispute in the ultrasound or medical imaging technology space, where Sonosite alleges unauthorized use of patented technology. The outcome could affect Butterfly's ability to commercialize its products and establish design-around obligations.
Summary generated by AI from public docket data. Verify against the original filing before relying on it.
Coverage vs reality meter
Counsel of record
- Independent counselAlexander T. Piala, Jennifer C. Tempesta, Margaret Welsh +2 more
- Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLPJeremy A. Tigan
- Independent counselBrooks J. Kenyon, C. Brandon Rash, Clark Gordon +5 more
- Farnan LLPBrian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan
- Court
- DED
- Docket no.
- 1:22-cv-00309
- Nature of suit
- Patent
- Filed
- 2022-03-09
- Last filing
- 2023-11-14
- Terminated
- 2023-11-14
Cause
35:271 Patent Infringement
Entities in this case
Parties
FUJIFILM Sonosite, Inc. (plaintiff) FUJIFILM Holdings America Corp. (defendant) FUJIFILM Corporation (defendant) BFLY Operations, Inc. (defendant) Butterfly Network, Inc. (defendant)
Docket entries
- 2023-09-13
Motion Hearing
- 2023-07-07
Markman Hearing
- 2023-07-07
Add Attorneys - PHV only
- 2023-06-29
- CORRECTING ENTRY
- 2023-06-22
Markman Hearing
- 2023-05-16
Oral Argument
- 2023-03-30
Discovery Conference
- 2022-11-01
Add Attorneys - PHV only
- 2022-09-15
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Jon P McCalla - Scheduling Conference held via Zoom on 9/15/2022. Robert Maier, Jennifer Tempesta and Cameron Clark appeared for the plaintiff along with FUJIFILM representatives, Frank Gallucci and Tatsuya Fujinami. Steven Maslowski, Paul Tripodi, II, Brian Farnan, C. Brandon Rash, Clark Gordon, and Jason Weil appeared for the defendant along with Butterfly Network corporate representative, Kevin McGoff. This is an action under United States patent law, 35 U.S.C. §§ 100 et seq. with seven patents in dispute. Terms at issue, and grouping, briefly discussed. Defendant indicates IPRs will be filed. The court reviewed proposed schedule. A Protective Order will be submitted by September 29, 2022. The Claims Construction Hearing is set for Friday, June 16, 2023 at 9:30 AM (ET) in Delaware in a courtroom to be determined. An Order will be entered. (Court Reporter: Tina Gibson). (srs) Modified on 9/16/2022 (srs).
- 2022-09-15
CORRECTING ENTRY: D.I. 26 Removed, Inadvertent Filing. (srs)
- 2022-09-15
~Util - Set Deadlines/Hearings AND Scheduling Conference
- 2022-09-15
- CORRECTING ENTRY
- 2022-08-23
Add Attorneys - PHV only
- 2022-08-09
Add Attorneys - PHV only
- 2022-06-07
Add Attorneys - PHV only
- 2022-06-06
Add Attorneys - PHV only
- 2022-04-28
Case Assigned/Reassigned
- 2022-03-18
SO ORDERED
- 2022-03-16
Case Assigned/Reassigned
- 2022-03-16
Case Assigned to Judge Maryellen Noreika. Please include the initials of the Judge (MN) after the case number on all documents filed. (rjb)
Docket history from CourtListener/RECAP — most recent first.