Defendant
1 case as defendant.
I'll research this company before writing the profile.
Life Technologies Corporation ("Life Technologies") was a US life-sciences and biotechnology company headquartered in Carlsbad, California. It was formed in November 2008 through the roughly $6.7 billion merger of Invitrogen Corporation and Applied Biosystems Inc., and traded on NASDAQ under the ticker LIFE. It became a subsidiary of Thermo Fisher Scientific in February 2014, when Thermo Fisher completed its approximately $13.6 billion cash acquisition. At the time of the deal, press materials described about 10,000 employees, sales of roughly $3.8 billion in 2012, and operations in more than 180 countries. The Life Technologies brand name was later retired by Thermo Fisher (around 2015).
Products / operations. Life Technologies was an operating company, not a licensor shell. It supplied reagents, consumables, instruments and systems for scientific research, genetic analysis and applied markets. Its major brands included Applied Biosystems (sequencing, real-time/digital PCR), Invitrogen (cell and molecular biology reagents, transfection, Dynabeads), Gibco (cell culture media and sera), Ion Torrent (semiconductor-based sequencing) and Molecular Probes. End markets spanned academic and life-sciences research, bioproduction, molecular diagnostics, forensics and food-safety testing. Its portfolio was reported to include roughly 50,000 products backed by about 5,000 patents and licenses.
Patent-litigation posture. In the tracked data, Life Technologies appears once and only as a defendant (0 plaintiff suits, 1 defendant suit). That profile is consistent with an operating company being targeted rather than a patent assertion entity. The single case is Troll Busters LLC v. Roche Diagnostics GmbH et al., filed January 10, 2011, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California (Judge Irma E. Gonzalez; Magistrate William V. Gallo), where Life Technologies was named alongside Roche Diagnostics entities.
Context. No plaintiff-side assertion activity by Life Technologies is recorded in this dataset. The case venue was the Southern District of California, not a plaintiff-friendly district such as the Eastern District of Texas. Detailed outcome information for the 2011 case is not reflected in the structured data above.
False marking action under 35 U.S.C. § 292 alleging defendants marked products with twenty-two expired PCR/molecular-biology patents, including US 4,889,818, after those patents had expired. The case was closed on 09/01/2011.