A federal court in the Southern District of Iowa has granted the summary judgment motion of a golf equipment company in a patent infringement suit, finding that the original determinations set forth in the order on claim construction almost 18 months earlier should stand.
Momentus Golf, Inc. sued Swingrite on May 31, 2002, alleging that the defendant infringed upon its “GOLF SWING TRAINER” patent. Swingrite answered the complaint and filed two counterclaims, one for declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity, and the second for interference with prospective business advantage. Various motions and orders followed.
The court noted that “as the trial date approached, the parties determined that in light of the court’s order on claim construction and grant of partial summary judgment on Swingrite’s counterclaim for interference with prospective business advantage, no genuine issues of material fact remained. The court conferred with counsel, and it was concluded that the court should proceed in the present manner in order to reach final judgment in this action.
“Accordingly, Swingrite filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, arguing this Court’s ruling on claim construction excludes Swingrite’s products from patent infringement on the ‘407 Patent. Momentus resists, urging the Court to reconsider its claim construction ruling.”
After weighing the evidence, the court held to the determinations set forth in the order on claim construction, allowing that order to stand.
“As Momentus’ counsel conceded at the hearing, if the court allows that order to stand, no genuine issue of material fact remains on its patent infringement claim against Swingrite to prevent the entry of summary judgment. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249. The court finds no triable issue remains; therefore, Swingrite’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Momentus’ claim of patent infringement (Clerk’s No. 149) must be granted.”
Momentus Golf, Inc. v. Swingrite Golf Corporation, A/K/A Swingrite Corporation; S.D.IA.; No. 4:02-cv-40252-JEG; 8/23/05
Attorneys of Record: (for plaintiff) Frank J Catalano of Gable & Gotwals in Tulsa, OK; J Campbell Helton of Whitfield & Eddy Plc in Des Moines, IA; Lawrence L Marcucci, John C Conger of Marcucci & Conger Plc in West Des Moines, IA; (for defendant) Daniel Joseph Bresnahan in Minneapolis, MN; David A Tank of Davis Brown Koehn Shors & Roberts in Des Moines, IA; Martin A Diaz of the Diaz Law Firm in Iowa City, IA.
