Court Dismisses Taser's Entire Case Against Bestex
Monday January 22, 9:00 am ET
LOS ANGELES, Jan. 22 /PRNewswire/ -- Bestex Company, Inc. today announced that the Honorable Percy Anderson, United States District Judge, has ordered Taser International, Inc.'s (Nasdaq: TASR - News) entire case against Bestex Company, Inc. (U.S. District Court for Central District of California case no. CV 06- 2636 PA (SHx)) dismissed. On January 8, 2007, pursuant to Bestex Company, Inc.'s motion for partial summary judgment, the Court ordered Taser's claims against Bestex for patent infringement and false marking dismissed. Pursuant to the same motion by Bestex Company, Inc, the court had already on November 13, 2006 ordered Taser's claims against Bestex for breach of contract and tortuous interference with contract dismissed. The January 8, 2007 order also dismissed Taser's last remaining claim against Bestex for unfair competition by patent infringement and false marking. The January 8, 2007 order allows for the refiling by Bestex Company, Inc. of its state law claim against Taser for unfair competition/false advertising, which was filed in case CV 06-2636 PA along with a Lanham Act claim as a counter claim.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Court also ordered Douglas Klint, Taser International, Inc.'s general counsel to "No later than January 16, 2007, the General Counsel of Taser international, Inc. shall file a declaration that addresses the following as well as any information he possesses about the failure to disclose the licensing agreement between John Cover and Anton Simson ... The theretofore "missing" license was critical to Bestex Company, Inc.'s arguments of non- infringement and was located by the Court, itself, as an attachment to a document signed by Taser International, Inc.'s C.E.O. Patrick "Rick" Smith, himself, and contained in the publicly available S.E.C. filings of Taser International, Inc. Taser International, Inc. had been arguing in its opposing papers that no such license existed. The Court's orders are available for public viewing through PACER an official case document retrieval site of the United States District Court at pacer.psc.uscourts.gov. Taser's general counsel filed his declaration on January 16, 2007.
Bestex Company, Inc. also announced that it is now weighing whether to refile its California state unfair competition/false advertising claim and the filing of additional malicious prosecution, abuse of judicial process and Lanham Act unfair competition claims for Taser International, Inc.'s prosecution of case CV 06-2636 PA (SHx) and/or communications preliminary thereto. Commenting, Mr. Park, C.E.O. of Bestex Company, Inc., stated, "I don't know what Taser International, Inc. was here doing. As it regularly makes decisions that conflict between the interests of its members and of its public investors, it has always been my opinion that the integrity of a publicly held company's governance and executives is its greatest asset. One can only hope that Taser International, Inc. had no current knowledge of this license prior to filing case CV 06-2636 PA (SHx) and, otherwise, innocently, failed to disclose it, but the Cover to Simson license was attached to and effected a Cover to Taser International, Inc. license, which granted Taser International, Inc. the right to make, use and sell its gas propelled ammunition and which for years was a core asset, if not the core asset, of the company. Moreover, the license to Taser International, Inc. with the Cover to Simson license attached was signed by Taser International, Inc.'s current C.E.O. Patrick 'Rick' Smith."
Mr. Park continued "I am gratified that the Court has concurred with Bestex that Taser International, Inc.'s claims against Bestex Company, Inc. for patent infringement, false marking, breach of contract and tortuous interference with contract are legally baseless. Taser should never have initiated and certainly should not have continued the prosecution of this suit. It has always been Bestex Company, Inc.'s opinion that Taser International, Inc. initiated this suit only to convince its investors that it has a monopoly in the potentially huge consumer market for stun pistols and to, thereby, maintain the grossly speculative and unrealistic value of its stock, especially, as Stinger System Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: STIY - News) is now making great strides in the law enforcement market for stun pistols with its new S 200 model weapon with weapons already shipped to law enforcement and other major law enforcement agencies evaluating the technically advanced S 200. It has always been Bestex Company, Inc.'s opinion that in a completely competitive market with checked opportunities for expansion, Taser International, Inc.'s stock is ridiculously overpriced."
Mr. Park continued "It is interesting to note that in the wake of the dismissal of its patent infringement, false marking and unfair competition suit against Bestex Company, Inc., a seller of consumer stun guns, Taser International, Inc. has now filed a suit (U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona case no. CV07-0042-PHX-DGC) against Stinger Systems, Inc., the only current competitive manufacturer of stun pistols for law enforcement, for patent infringement, false marking and unfair competition. One hopes that Taser International, Inc.'s patent infringement suit against Stinger Systems, Inc. has more merit than its patent infringement suit against Bestex Company, Inc. did and isn't just being filed in a desperate attempt to scare law enforcement agencies away from buying Stinger System, Inc.'s technically advanced S 200 weapon and/or to convince Taser International, Inc.'s investors that it has no competitors in the law enforcement market for stun pistols and, thereby, maintain what in Bestex Company, Inc.'s opinion is, again, the grossly speculative and unrealistic value of Taser's stock."
Finally, Mr. Park stated "While I have no ownership interest or agreements with Stinger Systems, Inc., whatsoever, I keep abreast of developments in my industry and have evaluated Stinger System, Inc.'s S 200 weapon and consider it the most technically advanced, effective and reasonably priced law enforcement stun pistol that I have seen in my over 20 years of experience in selling stun weapons. It would be an absolute shame if any underhanded tactics kept this extraordinary weapon out of the hands of our law enforcement protectors. One hopes that competitors can go toe to toe on the merits of their products alone. Bestex looks forward to continuing to compete against Taser International, Inc. in the consumer market with reliable stun weapons, priced for consumer consumption. Technical data and photographs of Stinger System, Inc.'s new S 200 weapon can be viewed at stingersystems.com."
The Law Office of James Francis McNulty, Jr. handled Bestex Company, Inc.'s defense in case CV 06-2636 PA (SHx). |
