Kaotica IP Corp. v. Iconic Mars Corporation

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaAugust 23, 20213:21-cv-00433California1,070 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. Background

19 According to the complaint, Plaintiff Kaotica IP Corporation (“Kaotica”) owns 20 United States Patent Numbers 8,737,662 and D733,690, both of which are entitled “Noise 21 Mitigating Microphone Attachment (the “‘662 Patent” and “‘690 Patent”, respectively). 22 [Doc. No. 1 at ¶¶ 9, 12.] Kaotica also owns a copyright on packaging for the “Kaotica 23 Eyeball” noise mitigating microphone attachment. [Id. at ¶ 15.] The complaint alleges 24 that Defendants have infringed both Patents and the copyright and trade dress related to the 25 Kaotica Eyeball. 26 Defendants filed an answer along with eleven affirmative defenses and 27 counterclaims for declaratory judgment of patent non-infringement, patent invalidity, and 28 copyright non-infringement . [Doc. No. 14.] Plaintiffs move to dismiss the counterclaims for non-infringement and invalidity of the ‘662 Patent and to strike affirmative defenses two through seven. II. Legal Standards A. Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims “A motion to dismiss a counterclaim brought pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) is analyzed under the same standard as a Rule…

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.