Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-cv-00468-JJF Document 42 Filed 05/23/2008 Page 1 of 2
POtt€r Richard L. Horwitz
M Mdeteee xrrzzyillw
l*‘·* COYTOOH Ll-P ri1orwitz@potterandersoncom 1
302 984-6027 Direct Phone 0
1313 North Mailcet Street 302 65 Sui E92 Fax
PO. Box 951 Z
Wilmington, DE 19899-095l
302 984 6000
www.pottcrander·so11.com `
May as, zoos A
VIA ELECTRONIC FILING _ Z
The Honorable Joseph J. Farnan, Jr. y
United States District Court ¥
844 North King Street Z
Wilmington, DE 19801
Re: ICU Medical, Inc. v. Rymcd Technologies, Inc.
C.A. No. 0'7-468-JJF
Dear fudge Farnan:
As a follow up to the letter we submitted yesterday, ICU submits a copy of the Order
_ Granting in Part ICU’s Motion to Dismiss and Denying lCU's Application to Transfer, which `
- issued yesterday from the Central District of California. Under this Order, RyMed's declaratory r
patent claims are dismissed from the California action and will proceed in this Delaware action.
Ryl\/led's non-patent claims will proceed separately in the Central District of California.
As a result ofthe California Order, even under RyMed's position, there is now no reason
why the patties cannot move forward with a scheduling conference at the Court’s earliest
Z convenience.
Respectfully, _
/s/Richard L. Horwitz
Richard L. Horwitz ’
RLH/nmt
866043 / 321 i6
Enclosure
cc: Clerk ofthe Court (via hand delivery)
Counsel of Record (via electronic mail) Z

Case 1 :07-cv-00468-JJF Document 42 i Filed 05/23/2008 Page 2 of 2
tee 8:07—cv—01199—MRP—VBK Document 38 Filed 05/21‘l”2008 of 1
1
2
3 , UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ·
4 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5
sa
6 RYIWED TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Case N0. CV 07-I 199 DKK)
7 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART
v. ICU ME CAL, INC.’S MOTION
. 8 TO DISMISS‘ ANDé2) DENYING
ICU IVIEDICAL, INC., ICU MEDICAL IN . S
9 . APPLICATION, TO TRANSFER
Defendant. VENUE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §
10 - 1404(a).
. 11 `
12 In a May 8, 2008 telephone conference, the Court and counsei discussed the possibility o
13 transferring this case, in whole or in part, to the District of Delaware, where a "tirst-ti1ed” action
14 involving related patent claims is proceeding. At the time, the Court indicated that it was
inclined to transfer the whole case to the District of Delaware.
i 15 Air carefully reviewing all papers submitted by the parties again, however, the Court
n 16 deems it appropriate to retain the unfair competition claims in Rymed’s Complaint (Counts 13-
17 21) for adjudication here. Thus, the Court, in its discretion, denies ICU Medica}, Inc.’s
18 Application to Transfer Venue Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). See 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a);
19 Commodity Futures Trading Com. VT Savage, 611 1-`°.2d 270, 279 (9th Cir. 1979).
2Q Because Counts E-12 of Rymed’s Complaint assert patent claims substantiaily related to
21 those proceeding in the District of Delaware, the Court grants ICU’s Motion to Dismiss with
22 respect to those counts in favor ofthe tirst-tiled case in Delaware. See Elecs. For Imaging, Inc.
23 v. Coyle, 394 F.3d 1341, 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
24 ,
25 IT IS SO ORDERED.
26 ·
27 DATED: / ·
I on. ariana _. i’fae1 r
gg ‘ United States District Judge
-;-