Kuzmak

Inamed Corp. v. Kuzmak

Good Law
275 F. Supp. 2d 1100·2002 WL 32140320·2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26326
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMay 28, 2002CV 99-02160 MMMCalifornia18,964 words

Opinion

Opinion

Morrow, J.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANTS

On February 26, 1999, plaintiffs Inamed Corporation, Inamed Development Company, and Bioenterics Corporation filed a complaint against Lubomyr I. Kuzmak, seeking a declaration that certain patents held by Kuzmak were invalid and unenforceable, and that plaintiffs had not infringed the patents. Plaintiffs also alleged that Kuzmak had engaged in patent misuse, and that he had breached certain licensing agreements. The parties engaged in settlement negotiations regarding these and other disputes that culminated in a letter agreement on January 24, 2000. A dispute arose regarding the enforceability of the agreement, however, and claims related to that issue were added to the action in plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint. Kuzmak has since sold his interest in the patents and the damage claims asserted in his counterclaim against the Inamed companies to Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc., which was added as a co-defendani/coun-terclaimant on March 6, 2002.

Plaintiffs have moved for summary judgment on their seventh cause of action, which seeks specific performance of the purported…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.