Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Joao Bock Transaction Systems, LLC v. Jack Henry & Associates, Inc.

United States District Court, Third Circuit

June 13, 2013

JOAO BOCK TRANSACTION SYSTEMS, LLC, Plaintiff,
v.
JACK HENRY & ASSOCIATES, INC., Defendant.

Stamatious Stamoulis, Esquire and Richard C. Weinblatt, Esquire of Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC, Wilmington, Delaware. Counsel for Plaintiff. Of Counsel: Maureen V. Abbey, Esquire, Jacqueline K. Burt, Esquire, M. Blair Clinton, Esquire, Joseph C. Gabaeff, Esquire, Jonathan R. Miller, Esquire, and Steven W. Ritcheson, Esquire of Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC.

Shanti M. Katona, Esquire of Polsinelli Shughart PC, Wilmington, Delaware. Counsel for Defendant. Of Counsel: Russell S. Jones, Jr., Esquire, Joshua M. McCaig, Esquire, and Richard P. Stitt, Esquire of Polsinelli Shughart PC.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

SUE L. ROBINSON, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

On September 14, 2012, Joao Bock Transaction Services, LLC ("JBTS") filed a complaint against defendant Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. ("Jack Henry"), alleging that certain Jack Henry products, "such as but not limited to its goDough' and NetTeller Online Banking' products, " infringe U.S. Patent No. 7, 096, 003 ("the '003 Patent"). (D.I. 1) On December 3, 2012, Jack Henry answered and counterclaimed. (D.I. 6) Presently before the court is JBTS' motion for dismissal of Jack Henry's counterclaims and to strike certain affirmative defenses and background information, filed December 27, 2012 (D.I. 11), and Jack Henry's motion for leave to file amended counterclaim, filed February 12, 2013 (D. I. 21). The court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยงยง 1331 and 1338(a).

II. BACKGROUND

JBTS is a Delaware limited liability company and maintains its principal place of business at 116 Sweetfield Circle, Yonkers, New York 10704. (D. I. 1 at 1-2) Jack Henry is a Delaware corporation and maintains its principal place of business at 663 W. Highway 60, P.O. Box 807, Monett, MO 65708. (D. I. 1 at 2)

Jack Henry's answer and counterclaim includes statements such as:

... The '003 patent contained the exact same priority date (subject to a terminal disclaimer), specification, description and drawings as [U.S. Patent No. 6, 529, 725 ('"725 Patent")]. The claims of the ['725][1] and the '003 patents are substantially - in many cases almost word for word - the same. To obtain the '003 patent, JBTS dumped hundreds of references totaling over 3200 pages - including the art JHA had disclosed in discovery in the Sleepy Hollow litigation - on the examiner....
1.... The substance of this patent was litigated in 2010 in the Southern District of New York, where a jury found unanimously that the ['725][2] patent, from which the '003 patent claims priority, was invalid and that Jack Henry's product did not infringe it....
9.... However, Jack Henry denies that there was a "full and fair examination" of this patent. Raymond Joao dumped numerous references totaling thousands of pages on the patent office, including documents obtained during the litigation of the '725 patent, documents he knew the patent office would not actually consider but that would be documented on the face of the patent. Raymond Joao is a patent attorney and engaged in activities that necessarily prevented a fair and full examination of the '003 patent....
24.... The claims in the '003 patent are substantially similar if not virtually identical to the claims in the '725 patent, and the court's final judgments of non-infringement and invalidity in the Sleepy Hollow litigation (which the Federal Circuit affirmed) preclude JBTS' asserting claims in the '003 patent against Jack Henry....
33. Jack Henry avers that U.S. Patent No. 7, 096, 003 is void, invalid and unenforceable for the reasons set forth in its Answer to ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.