In Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc. v. Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., C.A. No. 16-358-RGA (D. Del. Jan. 31, 2017), Judge Richard G. Andrews denied Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s willfulness allegations. Noting that “[a]t the pleading stage, it is not necessary to show that the case is egregious,” id. at 2, the Court went on to observe that the complaint alleged that Plaintiff “gave [Defendant] notice of its infringement of the patent-in-suit as early as March 2013. On January 2014, proposed licensing terms were sent to [Defendant]. On May 6, 2015, [Plaintiff] sent a letter to [Defendant] of a reminder that sales of the accused products constitute infringement of the patent-in-suit. [Plaintiff] alleges that [Defendant], or one of its subsidiary or affiliated companies directed the filing of the opposition to a European patent that is a counterpart to the patent-in-suit. Accused products continue to be sold.” Id. at 3. The Court concluded that foregoing facts sufficiently alleged willfulness.