Springfield Inc

General

Total Cases1

Active Cases1

Patents23

CourtsC.D. Illinois

TypeOperating Company

Elite Ratings

--

myspringfield.com

springfield-8e9e

springfield-clothing

Ratings

Experience

Grade

Trend

DCT

--

--

--

PTAB

--

--

--

CAFC

--

--

--

Analytics

Cases

Litigated Patents

Ratings Trends

Recent Dockets

Entered	Case	Description
07/06/23	Sig Sauer Inc v. Springfield 4:21-CV-04085 ( C.D. IL )	NOTICE of Appearance of Attorney by Howard Susser on behalf of SIG SAUER INC. (Susser, Howard) (Entered: 07/06/2023)
06/30/23	Sig Sauer Inc v. Springfield 4:21-CV-04085 ( C.D. IL )	NOTICE of Withdrawal of Eric G. J. Kaviar (Kaviar, Eric) (Entered: 06/30/2023)
06/28/23	Sig Sauer Inc v. Springfield 4:21-CV-04085 ( C.D. IL )	REPORT on the filing or determination of an action regarding patent by SIG SAUER INC. (JJK) (Entered: 06/28/2023)
06/28/23	Sig Sauer Inc v. Springfield 4:21-CV-04085 ( C.D. IL )	Defendant Springfield Inc.'s Surreply Responsive Claim Construction Brief. (ED) (Entered: 06/28/2023)
06/28/23	Sig Sauer Inc v. Springfield 4:21-CV-04085 ( C.D. IL )	TEXT ORDER entered by Chief Judge Sara Darrow on June 28, 2023. Defendant Springfield, Inc. d/b/a Springfield Armory has filed a 55 Motion for Leave to File Surreply Responsive Claim Construction Brief, seeking leave to file a surreply to the 49 51 53 claim construction briefing pending before the Court. Defendant "requests leave to respond only to the newly raised issues in [Plaintiff Sig Sauer Inc.'s] 53 reply," namely, Plaintiff's request to exclude certain newly proposed claim construction terms and for attorney's fees and costs related to the excluded terms. 55 Mot. Leave File Surreply 1; see also 53 Reply 5-7. Plaintiff opposes the 55 motion, arguing that this is yet another example of Defendant "disregard[ing] the agreed-upon claim construction process" and that Defendant "is simply seeking to get the last word." 56 Opp'n Mot. Leave File Surreply 1-2. The Seventh Circuit has noted that, where the local rules permit the filing of a reply brief, "[t]he decision to permit the filing of a surreply is purely discretionary and should generally be allowed only for valid reasons, such as when the movant raises new arguments in a reply brief." See Meraz-Camacho v. United States, 417 F. App'x 558, 559 (7th Cir. 2011). Here, the Court will permit Defendant to file a surreply because Plaintiff has raised a new issue in its reply. Plaintiff only makes its request to exclude certain of Defendant's proposed claim construction terms and for attorney's fees and costs in its Reply, see 53 Reply 5-7, and the proposed surreply addresses the issues underlying these requests, see [55-1] Proposed Surreply. The Court will address whether Plaintiff's proposed claim construction terms should be excluded and whether attorney's fees and costs are appropriate on the merits at a later time. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant's 55 Motion for Leave to File Surreply Responsive Claim Construction Brief. The Clerk is DIRECTED to file the [55-1] proposed surreply on the docket. (AAK) (Entered: 06/28/2023) TEXT ORDER entered by Chief Judge Sara Darrow on June 28, 2023. Defendant Springfield, Inc. d/b/a Springfield Armory has filed a 55 Motion for Leave to File Surreply Responsive Claim Construction Brief, seeking leave to file a surreply to the 49 51 53 claim construction briefing pending before the Court. Defendant "requests leave to respond only to the newly raised issues in [Plaintiff Sig Sauer Inc.'s] 53 reply," namely, Plaintiff's request to exclude certain newly proposed claim construction terms and for attorney's fees and costs related to the excluded terms. 55 Mot. Leave File Surreply 1; see also 53 Reply 5-7. Plaintiff opposes the 55 motion, arguing that this is yet another example of Defendant "disregard[ing] the agreed-upon claim construction process" and that Defendant "is simply seeking to get the last word." 56 Opp'n Mot. Leave File Surreply 1-2. The Seventh Circuit has noted that, where the local rules permit the filing of a reply brief, "[t]he decision to permit the filing of a surreply is purely discretionary and should generally be allowed only for valid reasons, such as when the movant raises new arguments in a reply brief." See Meraz-Camacho v. United States, 417 F. App'x 558, 559 (7th Cir. 2011). Here, the Court will permit Defendant to file a surreply because Plaintiff has raised a new issue in its reply. Plaintiff only makes its request to exclude certain of Defendant's proposed claim construction terms and for attorney's fees and costs in its Reply, see 53 Reply 5-7, and the proposed surreply addresses the issues underlying these requests, see [55-1] Proposed Surreply. The Court will address whether Plaintiff's proposed claim construction terms should be excluded and whether attorney's fees and costs are appropriate on the merits at a later time. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendant's 55 Motion for Leave to File Surreply Responsive Claim Construction Brief. The Clerk is DIRECTED to file the [55-1] proposed surreply on the docket. (AAK) (Entered: 06/28/2023)
05/03/23	Sig Sauer Inc v. Springfield 4:21-CV-04085 ( C.D. IL )	Set/Reset Hearings: Claim Construction Hearing set for 9/21/2023 at 1:00 p.m. in U.S. Courthouse, 100 N.E. Monroe St., Peoria, IL, 61602 before Chief Judge Sara Darrow. (RES) (Entered: 05/03/2023)
05/02/23	Sig Sauer Inc v. Springfield 4:21-CV-04085 ( C.D. IL )	TEXT ORDER entered by Chief Judge Sara Darrow on May 2, 2023. The Claim Construction Hearing is set for September 21, 2023 at 1:00 P.M., to be held at the U.S. District Courthouse in Peoria, Illinois before Chief Judge Sara Darrow. (AAK) (Entered: 05/02/2023)
04/27/23	Sig Sauer Inc v. Springfield 4:21-CV-04085 ( C.D. IL )	STATUS REPORT Supplemental Joint Claim Construction Status Report by SIG SAUER INC.. (Carroll, Laura) (Entered: 04/27/2023)
02/03/23	Sig Sauer Inc v. Springfield 4:21-CV-04085 ( C.D. IL )	MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 55 MOTION for Leave to File Surreply Responsive Claim Construction Brief filed by Plaintiff SIG SAUER INC.. (Carroll, Laura) (Entered: 02/03/2023)
01/20/23	Sig Sauer Inc v. Springfield 4:21-CV-04085 ( C.D. IL )	MOTION for Leave to File Surreply Responsive Claim Construction Brief by Counter Claimant Springfield, Inc. d/b/a Springfield Armory, Defendant Springfield, Inc. d/b/a Springfield Armory. Responses due by 2/3/2023 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-Surreply Brief with Exhibits H-N)(Bereveskos, Spiro) (Entered: 01/20/2023)