Motion to Strike Supplemental Infringement Contentions Granted

Outside the Box Innovations, LLC d/b/a Union Rich USA v. Travel Caddy, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:05-CV-02482 (N.D. Ga. Aug. 26, 2008) (Evans, J.)

Plaintiff Union Rich seeks a declaratory judgment that its products do not infringe Defendant Travel Caddy’s patents relating to tool bags. In February 2006, Travel Caddy filed its infringement contentions under the Local Patent Rules and identified two Union Rich products as infringing. In May and August 2006, during depositions of Union Rich employees, Travel Caddy learned of two other products that Union Rich was seeking to manufacture for a third-party, Johnson Level. It was not until January 2008, however, that Travel Caddy filed supplemental infringement contentions to identify the Johnson Level tool bags as accused products. Union Rich moved to strike Travel Caddy’s supplemental contentions as untimely.

Must Show Good Cause for Delay: Judge Evans granted the motion, finding that Travel Caddy had not made a showing of good cause, required under the Local Patent Rules, for its delay in amending its infringement contentions. Travel Caddy argued that its delay was justified because it had only recently discovered evidence that Union Rich sold the tool bags to Johnson Level. The Court, however, determined that Travel Caddy should have supplemented its infringement contentions promptly after learning, in May 2006, “about the possibility that Union Rich might sell these two products to Johnson Level.” Accordingly, the Court directed that Travel Caddy’s supplemental infringement contentions be stricken from the docket.