Shum v. Intel Corporation et al

Filing 980

JUDGMENT AS TO STATE LAW CLAIMS AND PARTIAL JUDGMENT AS TO INVENTORSHIP CLAIMS. Signed by Judge D. Lowell Jensen on 4/29/09. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/29/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Frank T. Shum,

) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Intel Corp., et al ) ) Defendants. ) ______________________________) Intentional Misrepresentation

No. C-02-3262-DLJ

JUDGMENT AS TO STATE LAW CLAIMS AND PARTIAL JUDGMENT AS TO INVENTORSHIP CLAIMS

On April 29, 2009, the Court entered an Order granting Defendants' renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) as to plaintiff Frank Shum's claim for Intentional Misrepresentation. Pursuant to this Order, the Court hereby

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

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

enters Judgment on this cause of action in favor of defendants Jean-Marc Verdiell, LightLogic, Inc., and Intel Corporation, and against plaintiff Frank Shum. Breach of Contract On April 29, 2009, the Court entered an Order granting Defendants' renewed motion for JMOL as to plaintiff Frank Shum's claim for Breach of Contract. Pursuant to this Order,

the Court hereby enters Judgment on this cause of action in favor of defendant Jean-Marc Verdiell and against plaintiff Frank Shum. Unjust Enrichment On April 29, 2009, the Court entered an Order granting Defendants' renewed motion for JMOL as to plaintiff Frank Shum's claim for Unjust Enrichment. Pursuant to this Order,

the Court hereby enters Judgment on this cause of action in favor of defendants Jean-Marc Verdiell, LightLogic, Inc., and Intel Corporation, and against plaintiff Frank Shum.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Inventorship U.S. Patent No. 6,227,724 On April 29, 2009, the Court entered an Order granting Defendants' renewed motion for JMOL as to plaintiff Frank Shum's claim for correction of patent inventorship of claim 5 of the `724 patent. Pursuant to this Order, the Court hereby

enters Judgment that plaintiff Frank Shum is not a co-inventor of claim 5 of the `724 patent. U.S. Patent No. 6,585,427 Pursuant to the unanimous verdict of the Jury, the Court hereby enters Judgment that plaintiff Frank Shum is not a coinventor of claims 20, 22 and 23 of the `427 patent; and On April 29, 2009, the Court entered an Order granting Defendants' renewed motion for JMOL as to plaintiff Frank Shum's claim for correction of patent inventorship of claim 1 of the `427 patent. Pursuant to this Order, the Court hereby

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

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

enters Judgment that plaintiff Frank Shum is not a co-inventor of claim 1 of the `427 patent.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April _29, 2009

_________________________ D. Lowell Jensen United States District Judge

2