Executive summary:
Bottom Line-Holosun better buckle up.
Longish post warning. I am not a patent/IP atty and would defer to those who are.
I took a very quick gander at Trijicon's pleading. It essentially says:
1. we patented the technology in 2012
2. you have been knocking us off and selling an infringing product
3. we asked you to stop 3x in writing to cease and desist
4. you did not stop so your continued infringement is willful and deliberate which will entitle use to treble (3x) damages
The initial pleading is short and will no doubt be amended as time goes on and the discovery process goes forward.
Trijicon has a seemingly well established lead counsel out of the Detroit area who has been an atty for 30 ish years
Trijicon has associated with a very boutique oriented IP law in SOCAL. Local counsel is SOCAL to the bone- USC- BS Math/Physics and Loyola Law School JD, Dean’s Honor’s List. Local counsel did an "externship" in the same federal court district where this case now pends.
The district court judge who is hearing the case and would try it as well is a Cornell BA/Yale JD who has been a judge for almost 20 years (9+ federally). He was a big firm guy before that in "complex litigation" in both LA and DC.
The magistrate judge who may handle some off the initial discovery issues etc. went to Wellesley BA/UCLA JD and was an IP type atty in private practice for nearly 20 yrs before going on the bench.
Recall Surefire sued a number of flashlight companies out of business and/or made them change stuff up over similar allegations of patent infringement. (Based on my cursory research. I freely acknowledge that other issues may have been in play to include some folks simply not being able to afford to defend themselves in court v. SF)
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/7412