The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida Orlando Division recently denied a motion to vacate a ruling ordered in the patent infringement suit against CalAmp Corporation. Based on a ruling given by the U.S. Supreme Court in a similar case, the defendants moved to vacate the judgment and dismiss for lack of venue.
The suit was brought by Omega Patents LLC which has accused the telematics pioneer of infringing on five separate patents for vehicle tracking. In July, Omega was granted a $3 million award which was later increased by $12 million at the behest of the judge who believed the case to be exceptional. CalAmp has maintained that the patents in question were invalid and now argues that the venue was improper
In the background provided by the order, an excerpt from a signed agreement between the two companies stated that if a patent suit were to arise from specific patents including one referred to as the 989 patent named in the suit, the matter would be handled by U.S. District Court Orlando Division. It was also noted in the order that the defendants failed to contest the venue at the time of filing.
CalAmp later said the previous order should be vacated and the suit moved to California off the Supreme Court ruling in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC which established “how venue is to be determined in these actions in the absence of a stipulation to venue accompanied by pendent venue.” U.S. District Judge Paul G. Byron determined that as the venue was proper for the 989 patent, the TC Heartland ruling has no bearing on the CalAmp suit.
The order was filed electronically with the courts Sept. 22.