Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

Olaf Sööt Design, LLC v. Daktronics Hoist, Inc.

Olaf Sööt Design, LLC v. Daktronics Hoist, Inc.

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York

July 17, 2018, Decided; July 18, 2018, Filed

15 Civ. 5024 (RWS)

Opinion

 [*458]  Sweet, D.J.

 [*459]  Defendants Daktronics, Inc. and Daktronics Hoist, Inc. ("Daktronics" or the "Defendants") move for summary judgment on the issue of willful infringement, a claim that was brought by Plaintiff Olaf Sööt Design, LLC ("OSD" or the "Plaintiff"). Defendants also move for sanctions under 28 U.S.C. Section 1927 in response to Plaintiff's Rule 37 motion for relief based on alleged discovery misconduct. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted. Plaintiff's motion for Rule 37 sanctions is denied. Defendants' cross-motion for sanctions under 28 U.S.C. Section 1927 sanctions is denied.

Prior Proceedings

The following factual background is set forth only as necessary to resolve the instant motions. A comprehensive factual background detailing the '485 Patent infringement claims, this Court's claim constructions, and the denial of Defendants' summary judgment motion can be [**2]  found in prior opinions of the Court. See Olaf Soot Design, LLC v. Daktronics, Inc. 220 F. Supp. 3d 458, 462 (S.D.N.Y. 2016), reconsideration denied, No. 15 Civ. 5024 (RWS), 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75278, 2017 WL 2191612 (S.D.N.Y. May 17, 2017). Familiarity with these opinions, as well as the facts of this case, is assumed.

The '485 Patent covers a winch system designed to move large theatre scenes on and off stage quickly and efficiently, replacing the cumbersome counterweight systems that came before it. Olaf Soot Design, LLC v. Daktronics, Inc., 220 F. Supp. 3d at 462.

On June 25, 2015, Plaintiff, an engineering and design company specializing in the performing arts, brought this action alleging patent infringement as to U.S. Patent No. 6,520,485 ("the '485 Patent") against Defendants, two corporations engaged in the manufacture and sale of theatre rigging equipment and winch systems.

On October 26, 2016, after hearing Plaintiff's motion for claim construction and Defendants' motion for summary judgment, the Court construed twelve claim constructions on the '485 Patent and denied Defendants' summary judgment motion on the issue of non-infringement. Dkt. 72.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

325 F. Supp. 3d 456 *; 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120043 **; 2018 WL 3462510

OLAF SÖÖT DESIGN, LLC, Plaintiff, - against - DAKTRONICS, INC. and DAKTRONICS HOIST, INC., Defendants.

Subsequent History: Reconsideration denied by Olaf St Design, LLC v. Daktronics, Inc., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 200561 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 27, 2018)

Prior History: Olaf St Design, LLC v. Daktronics, Inc., 220 F. Supp. 3d 458, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148357 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 26, 2016)

CORE TERMS

infringement, patent, willful, summary judgment, sanctions, summary judgment motion, no evidence, discovery, parties, courts, motion for sanctions, attorney's fees, due diligence, material fact, willfully, damages