Mformation Technologies, Inc. v. Research in Motion Limited et al

Filing 1121

ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Granting 1085 Plaintiff's Motion to Correct Judgment. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/6/2012)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

MFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13

No. C-08-4990 EMC

Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO CORRECT JUDGMENT

v.
RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED, et al.

(Docket No. 1085)

Defendants.
___________________________________/

14
15
16

Having considered the motion, all papers that are related thereto, and the argument of

17

counsel, for the reasons stated on the record, the Court hereby GRANTS Mformation’s Motion to

18

Correct Judgment Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 59(e) and 60(a).

19

The Court hereby amends its judgment to read as follows:

20

Pursuant to the Court’s November 18, 2010 Order (Docket No. 355), December 19, 2011

21

Order (Docket No. 691), and August 8, 2012 Order Granting RIM’s Renewed Motion for Judgment

22

as a Matter of Law (Docket No. 1074), judgment is hereby entered in favor of Defendants Research

23

in Motion Limited and Research in Motion Corporation against Plaintiff Mformation Technologies,

24

Inc. that Claims 1, 6, 21-25 and 27 of U.S. Patent No. 6,970,917 (“the ‘917 Patent”) are not

25

infringed by Defendants.

26

Pursuant to the Court’s July 5, 2012, ruling (Trial Tr., Docket No. 1013, at 2056-2062),

27

judgment is hereby entered in favor of Defendants Research in Motion Limited and Research in

28

Motion Corporation against Plaintiff Mformation Technologies, Inc. that claims 1, 6, 21-25 and 27

1

of the ‘917 patent are not willfully infringed by Defendants.

2

Pursuant to the Court’s November 18, 2010 Order (Docket No. 355), judgment is entered in

3

favor of Defendants Research in Motion Limited and Research in Motion Corporation against

4

Plaintiff Mformation Technologies, Inc. that Claims 2, 3, 9-20 and 28-48 of the ‘917 Patent are

5

invalid for lack of utility and enablement.

6

Pursuant to the Court’s December 19, 2011 Order (Docket No. 691), judgment is hereby

7

entered in favor of Defendants Research in Motion Limited and Research in Motion Corporation

8

against Plaintiff Mformation Technologies, Inc. that Plaintiff was required to mark its products to

9

claim pre-suit damages and failed to do so and Plaintiff cannot claim damages prior to October 27,
2008.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Pursuant to the Court’s December 19, 2011 Order (Docket No. 691), judgment is entered in

12

favor of Plaintiff Mformation Technologies, Inc. against Defendants Research in Motion Limited

13

and Research in Motion Corporation on Defendants’ counterclaim of unenforceability of U.S. Patent

14

No. 6,970,917 based upon inventorship or failure to properly disclose the Parkinson, Dimech or

15

Geiger references.

16

Pursuant to the April 8, 2011 Order on the Joint Stipulation of Dismissal (Docket No. 450),

17

Plaintiff Mformation Technologies, Inc. dismissed with prejudice all claims of infringement of U.S.

18

Patent No. 7,343,408 against Defendants Research in Motion Limited and Research in Motion

19

Corporation. Defendants’ remaining counterclaims with respect to U.S. Patent No. 7,343,408 are

20

dismissed without prejudice as moot.

21

Pursuant to the Court’s August 8, 2012 Order Granting RIM’s Renewed Motion for

22

Judgment as a Matter of Law (Docket No. 1074), Defendants’ remaining counterclaims for a

23

judgment of invalidity with respect to claims 1, 6, 21-25 and 27 of the ‘917 Patent are dismissed

24

without prejudice as moot. Defendants may reinstate their counterclaims and renew their Motion for

25

Judgment as a Matter of Law on all remaining grounds in the event that the United States Court of

26

Appeals for the Federal Circuit remands this case back to this Court, in whole or in part.

27

///

28

///

2

1

Plaintiff’s claims of infringement of claims 4 and 5 of the ‘917 Patent were not presented to

2

the jury and are therefore dismissed with prejudice. RIM’s counterclaim of invalidity of claims 4

3

and 5 of the ‘917 Patent is dismissed without prejudice as moot.

4

This order disposes of Docket No. 1085.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8

Dated: November 6, 2012

9

_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3