Internet Patents Corporation v. Quinstreet, Inc.

Filing 37

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 10/25/13. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/25/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 INTERNET PATENTS CORPORATION, 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 No. C 12-06506 JSW Plaintiff, v. QUINSTREET, INC., 12 ORDER OF DISMISSAL Defendant. / 13 14 In a related matter pending before this Court, Case No. 12-5036 JSW, the Court 15 dismissed the suit based on the finding that Plaintiff’s claims fail as a matter of law because the 16 asserted patent, United States Patent No. 7,707,505 (“the ’505 Patent”) entitled “Dynamic Tabs 17 for a Graphical User Interface” is invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for lack of patent-eligible 18 subject matter. On October 24, 2013, Plaintiff in that matter noticed its appeal of that decision. 19 It “is the duty of the court to dismiss a patent infringement suit whenever it appears that 20 the patent is invalid.” Barkeij v. Lockheed Aircraft Corp., 201 F.2d 1, 2 (9th Cir. 1954) 21 (citations omitted). Accordingly, this Court issued an order to show cause to Plaintiff as to why 22 this related matter premised upon the same patent should not be dismissed. In response, the 23 Court received essentially an improper motion for reconsideration of its opinion re invalidity. 24 The Court finds the response to the order to show cause unpersuasive. This matter is dismissed 25 as it is premised upon the assertion of a patent the Court has determined to be invalid. IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 27 28 Dated: October 25, 2013 JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?