Have to think some are too lackidasical to go to SkunK's blog to view this for themselves, so will make it more CONVEEENIENT for them!! Note the Six Slapdowns in a row: BASED on the pertaining Law covering each point!
"SkunK select quotes below as the judge responds to Iroquois,
Adkins, ICM:"
"CleanTech seeks to add the ‘516 Patent to its Complaint, which is a continuation patent of the patent in suit, U.S. Patent 7,601,858 (“the ‘858 Patent”) and is directed to the same technology."
"The Court has reviewed the briefing on this matter and for the following reasons GRANTS CleanTech’s motion."
"In the instant case, there has been no undue delay, bad faith, or dilatory motive. The ‘516 Patent issued on August 30, 2011. CleanTech filed its Motion to Amend on September 2, 2011. Further, the proposed amendment serves the goal of furthering the efficient adjudication of this case because the ‘516 and ‘858 Patents are directed to similar technology and involve similar claim terms."
'Finally, without citation, Iroquois states that CleanTech has not made any showing that its supplemental pleading comports with the “new patent reform act which became law on September 16, 2011.” It is not sufficient for Iroquois to baldly state that CleanTech’s proposed amendment does not comport with the law.'
"Adkins’s Response to CleanTech’s motion to amend is not the proper forum to litigate its contract dispute."
"As an initial matter, the Court notes that Mr. Vander Griend is currently a party to this action. Accordingly, CleanTech’s motion to amend is not seeking to add him as a party. Additionally, CleanTech is not required to assert any particular patent, and its choice to assert one patent does not preclude its decision not to assert another."
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
