20163679v1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

------------------------------------------------------x 

WM. WRIGLEY JR. COMPANY, : 

a Delaware corporation : 

 : Civ. Action No. 1:04-cv-00346 

 Plaintiff, : Judge: Hon. Robert M. Dow Jr. 

 : 

 v. : 

 : 

CADBURY ADAMS USA LLC, : 

a Delaware limited liability company : 

 : 

 Defendant. : 

------------------------------------------------------x 

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL 

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 41(a), Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company 

(“Wrigley”) and Cadbury Adams USA LLC (“Cadbury Adams”), by and through their 

undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree to the dismissal of the remaining claims and 

counterclaims between Cadbury Adams and Wrigley as follows: 

1. Wrigley’s Remaining Claims Dismissed With Prejudice: 

a. Wrigley’s claim of patent infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,627,233 (“the 

‘233 patent”) (Complaint, Dkt. 1, ¶12-18) 

b. Antitrust under Sherman Act (Joint Status Report, Dkt. 318 (“JSR”)1, p. 2; 

Wrigley’s Reply and Counterclaims to Cadbury’s Fourth Amended 

Answer and Counterclaim, Dkt. 75 (“WR”), ¶97-110) 

c. False Marking Under the Patent Act (JSR p. 2; WR ¶ 111-117) 

 

1

 In the cited Joint Status Report, the parties summarized the claims not addressed by the Court’s summary judgment 

ruling. The Court repeated this summary in its ruling certifying the summary judgment ruling for appeal under Rule 

54. (Dkt. 329 at p. 4). 

Case: 1:04-cv-00346 Document #: 356 Filed: 10/16/12 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:3651
20163679v1 

d. Lanham Act Violation (JSR p. 2; WSR ¶ 118-124) 

e. Declaratory Judgment for Non-Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,009,893 

(“the ‘893 patent”) by Wrigley (JSR p. 2; WR ¶ 125-127) 

f. Declaratory Judgment of Unenforceability due to patent misuse by 

Cadbury concerning the ‘893 Patent (JSR p. 2; WR ¶ 128-132). 

2. Cadbury’s Remaining Claims Dismissed With Prejudice: 

a. Willful infringement of the ‘893 Patent concerning Wrigley experimental 

formulations (JSR p. 2; FAAC ¶15-20). 

b. Infringement of the ‘893 patent concerning Wrigley commercial mint 

products (JSR p. 2; FAAC ¶15-20). 

3. Cadbury’s Remaining Claim Dismissed Without Prejudice: 

a. Cadbury’s claim for Declaratory Judgment of Unenforceability of the ‘233 

patent” (JSR p. 2; Fourth Amended Answer and Counterclaims 

(“FAAC”), Dkt. 66, ¶10-14). 

Each party agrees to bear its own costs and attorney’s fees. 

Dated: October 16, 2012 

Agreed to: 

Cadbury Adams USA LLC Wm. Wrigley Company 

/s/ James Bollinger /s/ James V. Suggs

James M. Bollinger James V. Suggs 

Troutman Sanders LLP McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP 

The Chrysler Building 300 South Wacker Drive 

405 Lexington Avenue Chicago, IL 60606 

New York, NY 10174-0700 (312) 913-2140 

(212) 704-6000 Attorneys for Wm. Wrigley Company 

Attorneys for Cadbury Adams USA LLC 

Case: 1:04-cv-00346 Document #: 356 Filed: 10/16/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:3652
20163679v1 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this the 16th day of October, 2012, I electronically filed the foregoing 

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF 

system which will send notification of the filing to the following: 

 

James V. Suggs 

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP 

300 South Wacker Drive 

Chicago, IL 60606 

Jason Engel 

K&L Gates LLP 

70 West Madison Street, Suite 3100 

Chicago, IL 60602 

 /s/ James Bollinger 

James M. Bollinger 

Troutman Sanders LLP 

The Chrysler Building 

405 Lexington Avenue 

New York, NY 10174-0700 

Case: 1:04-cv-00346 Document #: 356 Filed: 10/16/12 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:3653