Citation[]
Telcordia Technologies, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 592 F.Supp.2d 727 (D. Del. 2009) (full-text), aff’d in part, vacated in part, 612 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (full-text).
Trial Court Proceedings[]
The district court rejected licensing company Telcordia’s argument that it would suffer irreparable harm absent an injunction because “its lifeblood was its ability to enforce its patents and continue to generate innovative solutions. . . .”[1] The court found this argument lacking primarily because it consisted of merely attorney argument, with no supporting evidence of harm, such as lost sales, licensing or R&D opportunities. Telcordia was able to obtain licenses from other companies, suggesting that its licensing program was not harmed.[2]