Fiskars Brands Inc

General

Total Cases22

Active Cases1

Patents633

CourtsW.D. Wisconsin D. Oregon E.D. Texas

TypeOperating Company

Elite Ratings

--

fiskarsgroup.com

Ratings

Experience

Grade

Trend

DCT

--

--

--

PTAB

--

--

--

CAFC

--

--

--

Analytics

Cases

Litigated Patents

Ratings Trends

Recent Dockets

Entered	Case	Description
09/09/24	Fiskars Finland Oy Ab v. Woodland Tools Inc 3:22-CV-00540 ( W.D. WI )	TEXT ONLY ORDER Plaintiffs have filed an expedited motion to align the pretrial filing deadlines, Dkt. [320] , seeking to consolidate the deadline associated with liability issues, currently set for September 13, 2024, with the deadline associated with damages issues, currently set for September 16, 2024. Defendants oppose the request. The court does not view consolidation as reason enough to upset the schedule, particularly on such short notice. Consolidating the deadlines as proposed would shorten the time to respond on liability issues, even if by only a weekend, and that timing may matter in the weeks leading up to trial. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor on 9/9/2024. (voc) (Entered: 09/09/2024) TEXT ONLY ORDER Plaintiffs have filed an expedited motion to align the pretrial filing deadlines, Dkt. [320] , seeking to consolidate the deadline associated with liability issues, currently set for September 13, 2024, with the deadline associated with damages issues, currently set for September 16, 2024. Defendants oppose the request. The court does not view consolidation as reason enough to upset the schedule, particularly on such short notice. Consolidating the deadlines as proposed would shorten the time to respond on liability issues, even if by only a weekend, and that timing may matter in the weeks leading up to trial. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor on 9/9/2024. (voc) (Entered: 09/09/2024)
09/09/24	Fiskars Finland Oy Ab v. Woodland Tools Inc 3:22-CV-00540 ( W.D. WI )	TEXT ONLY ORDER Plaintiffs have filed an expedited motion to align the pretrial filing deadlines, Dkt. [320] , seeking to consolidate the deadline associated with liability issues, currently set for September 13, 2024, with the deadline associated with damages issues, currently set for September 16, 2024. Defendants oppose the request. The court does not view consolidation as reason enough to upset the schedule, particularly on such short notice. Consolidating the deadlines as proposed would shorten the time to respond on liability issues, even if by only a weekend, and that timing may matter in the weeks leading up to trial. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor on 9/9/2024. (voc) (Entered: 09/09/2024) TEXT ONLY ORDER Plaintiffs have filed an expedited motion to align the pretrial filing deadlines, Dkt. [320] , seeking to consolidate the deadline associated with liability issues, currently set for September 13, 2024, with the deadline associated with damages issues, currently set for September 16, 2024. Defendants oppose the request. The court does not view consolidation as reason enough to upset the schedule, particularly on such short notice. Consolidating the deadlines as proposed would shorten the time to respond on liability issues, even if by only a weekend, and that timing may matter in the weeks leading up to trial. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor on 9/9/2024. (voc) (Entered: 09/09/2024)
09/06/24	Fiskars Finland Oy Ab v. Woodland Tools Inc 3:22-CV-00540 ( W.D. WI )	Emergency Motion for Clarification re 307 Text Only Order,, Expedited Motion to Align Pretrial Filing Deadlines Currently Set for September 13 and 16, 2024 by Plaintiffs Fiskars Brands Inc., Fiskars Finland Oy Ab. Response due 9/13/2024. (Gregor, Jennifer) (Entered: 09/06/2024)
09/06/24	Fiskars Finland Oy Ab v. Woodland Tools Inc 3:22-CV-00540 ( W.D. WI )	Emergency Motion for Clarification re 307 Text Only Order,, Expedited Motion to Align Pretrial Filing Deadlines Currently Set for September 13 and 16, 2024 by Plaintiffs Fiskars Brands Inc., Fiskars Finland Oy Ab. Response due 9/13/2024. (Gregor, Jennifer) (Entered: 09/06/2024)
09/06/24	Fiskars Finland Oy Ab v. Woodland Tools Inc 3:22-CV-00540 ( W.D. WI )	TEXT ONLY ORDER In response to the court's order directing defendant Woodland Tools, Inc. to show cause why the court should not dismiss Woodland's invalidity counterclaims concerning the D720,969 and D684,828 patents, Dkt. 317, Woodland states that it has no objection to dismissal of those counterclaims without prejudice, Dkt. [318] . So, the court will decline to exercise jurisdiction over Woodland's invalidity counterclaims because there is no live case or controversy between the parties about the patents and DISMISS the invalidity counterclaims without prejudice. The court will also adjust the some of the pretrial deadlines to address a scheduling conflict with the original final pretrial conference date. The final pretrial conference is reset from October 9 to October 4 at 02:30 PM. The deadline for the parties' responses to motions in limine and other pretrial filings is reset from September 27 to September 24. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 9/6/2024. (jls) (Entered: 09/06/2024) TEXT ONLY ORDER In response to the court's order directing defendant Woodland Tools, Inc. to show cause why the court should not dismiss Woodland's invalidity counterclaims concerning the D720,969 and D684,828 patents, Dkt. 317, Woodland states that it has no objection to dismissal of those counterclaims without prejudice, Dkt. [318] . So, the court will decline to exercise jurisdiction over Woodland's invalidity counterclaims because there is no live case or controversy between the parties about the patents and DISMISS the invalidity counterclaims without prejudice. The court will also adjust the some of the pretrial deadlines to address a scheduling conflict with the original final pretrial conference date. The final pretrial conference is reset from October 9 to October 4 at 02:30 PM. The deadline for the parties' responses to motions in limine and other pretrial filings is reset from September 27 to September 24. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 9/6/2024. (jls) (Entered: 09/06/2024)
09/06/24	Fiskars Finland Oy Ab v. Woodland Tools Inc 3:22-CV-00540 ( W.D. WI )	TEXT ONLY ORDER In response to the court's order directing defendant Woodland Tools, Inc. to show cause why the court should not dismiss Woodland's invalidity counterclaims concerning the D720,969 and D684,828 patents, Dkt. 317, Woodland states that it has no objection to dismissal of those counterclaims without prejudice, Dkt. [318] . So, the court will decline to exercise jurisdiction over Woodland's invalidity counterclaims because there is no live case or controversy between the parties about the patents and DISMISS the invalidity counterclaims without prejudice. The court will also adjust the some of the pretrial deadlines to address a scheduling conflict with the original final pretrial conference date. The final pretrial conference is reset from October 9 to October 4 at 02:30 PM. The deadline for the parties' responses to motions in limine and other pretrial filings is reset from September 27 to September 24. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 9/6/2024. (jls) (Entered: 09/06/2024) TEXT ONLY ORDER In response to the court's order directing defendant Woodland Tools, Inc. to show cause why the court should not dismiss Woodland's invalidity counterclaims concerning the D720,969 and D684,828 patents, Dkt. 317, Woodland states that it has no objection to dismissal of those counterclaims without prejudice, Dkt. [318] . So, the court will decline to exercise jurisdiction over Woodland's invalidity counterclaims because there is no live case or controversy between the parties about the patents and DISMISS the invalidity counterclaims without prejudice. The court will also adjust the some of the pretrial deadlines to address a scheduling conflict with the original final pretrial conference date. The final pretrial conference is reset from October 9 to October 4 at 02:30 PM. The deadline for the parties' responses to motions in limine and other pretrial filings is reset from September 27 to September 24. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 9/6/2024. (jls) (Entered: 09/06/2024)
09/06/24	Fiskars Finland Oy Ab v. Woodland Tools Inc 3:22-CV-00540 ( W.D. WI )	Response re: 317 Text Only Order,,,, by Defendant Woodland Tools Inc.. (Van Camp, Elijah) (Entered: 09/06/2024)
09/06/24	Fiskars Finland Oy Ab v. Woodland Tools Inc 3:22-CV-00540 ( W.D. WI )	Response re: 317 Text Only Order,,,, by Defendant Woodland Tools Inc.. (Van Camp, Elijah) (Entered: 09/06/2024)
09/04/24	Fiskars Finland Oy Ab v. Woodland Tools Inc 3:22-CV-00540 ( W.D. WI )	TEXT ONLY ORDER Plaintiffs ask the court to clarify whether defendant Woodland Tools Inc.'s counterclaims for invalidity, which neither party addressed in the summary judgment briefing, are still at issue in the case following the court's decision granting summary judgment to Woodland on plaintiff's claims for infringement of the patents. Dkt. [316] . In cases like this where a court decides that a patent was not infringed, courts have discretion to hear an invalidity counterclaim or dismiss it with prejudice. Liquid Dynamics Corp. v. Vaughan Co., 355 F.3d 1361, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2004). If Fiskars had moved on this issue at summary judgment, the court would have declined to exercise jurisdiction over the invalidity counterclaims because there is no live case or controversy between the parties about the patents. Defendant may have until September 6 at noon to show cause why the court should not dismiss Woodland's invalidity counterclaims concerning the D720,969 and D684,828 patents. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 9/4/2024. (voc) (Entered: 09/04/2024) TEXT ONLY ORDER Plaintiffs ask the court to clarify whether defendant Woodland Tools Inc.'s counterclaims for invalidity, which neither party addressed in the summary judgment briefing, are still at issue in the case following the court's decision granting summary judgment to Woodland on plaintiff's claims for infringement of the patents. Dkt. [316] . In cases like this where a court decides that a patent was not infringed, courts have discretion to hear an invalidity counterclaim or dismiss it with prejudice. Liquid Dynamics Corp. v. Vaughan Co., 355 F.3d 1361, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2004). If Fiskars had moved on this issue at summary judgment, the court would have declined to exercise jurisdiction over the invalidity counterclaims because there is no live case or controversy between the parties about the patents. Defendant may have until September 6 at noon to show cause why the court should not dismiss Woodland's invalidity counterclaims concerning the D720,969 and D684,828 patents. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 9/4/2024. (voc) (Entered: 09/04/2024)
09/04/24	Fiskars Finland Oy Ab v. Woodland Tools Inc 3:22-CV-00540 ( W.D. WI )	TEXT ONLY ORDER Plaintiffs ask the court to clarify whether defendant Woodland Tools Inc.'s counterclaims for invalidity, which neither party addressed in the summary judgment briefing, are still at issue in the case following the court's decision granting summary judgment to Woodland on plaintiff's claims for infringement of the patents. Dkt. [316] . In cases like this where a court decides that a patent was not infringed, courts have discretion to hear an invalidity counterclaim or dismiss it with prejudice. Liquid Dynamics Corp. v. Vaughan Co., 355 F.3d 1361, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2004). If Fiskars had moved on this issue at summary judgment, the court would have declined to exercise jurisdiction over the invalidity counterclaims because there is no live case or controversy between the parties about the patents. Defendant may have until September 6 at noon to show cause why the court should not dismiss Woodland's invalidity counterclaims concerning the D720,969 and D684,828 patents. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 9/4/2024. (voc) (Entered: 09/04/2024) TEXT ONLY ORDER Plaintiffs ask the court to clarify whether defendant Woodland Tools Inc.'s counterclaims for invalidity, which neither party addressed in the summary judgment briefing, are still at issue in the case following the court's decision granting summary judgment to Woodland on plaintiff's claims for infringement of the patents. Dkt. [316] . In cases like this where a court decides that a patent was not infringed, courts have discretion to hear an invalidity counterclaim or dismiss it with prejudice. Liquid Dynamics Corp. v. Vaughan Co., 355 F.3d 1361, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2004). If Fiskars had moved on this issue at summary judgment, the court would have declined to exercise jurisdiction over the invalidity counterclaims because there is no live case or controversy between the parties about the patents. Defendant may have until September 6 at noon to show cause why the court should not dismiss Woodland's invalidity counterclaims concerning the D720,969 and D684,828 patents. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 9/4/2024. (voc) (Entered: 09/04/2024)