Ancora Technologies, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 122

FINAL JUDGMENT, ***Civil Case Terminated.. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 4/29/13. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/29/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ANCORA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
Plaintiff,

12
13

APPLE INC.,
Defendant.
APPLE INC.,
Counterclaim Plaintiff,

16
17
18

[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT

v.

14
15

Case No. CV 11-06357-YGR

v.
ANCORA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
Counterclaim Defendant.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT
CASE NO. 11-CV-06357-YGR
sf-3274748

1

1
2

FINAL JUDGMENT
Pursuant to the Court’s Claim Construction Order construing claim terms of U.S. Patent

3

No. 6,411,941 (the “’941 patent”) and finding that the claims of the ’941 patent are not invalid for

4

indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 2 with respect to the terms “volatile memory” and “non-

5

volatile memory,” and the Court’s Order Granting Apple Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment

6

finding that Apple Inc. has not infringed the ’941 patent, the Court ENTERS FINAL

7

JUDGMENT of:

8

(1) non-infringement of the ’941 patent and

9

(2) non-indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 2 with respect to the terms “volatile

10
11

memory” and “non-volatile memory.”
The Court also DISMISSES without prejudice Apple’s defenses and counterclaims,

12

except for those concerning indefiniteness under § 112, ¶ 2 with respect to the terms “volatile

13

memory” and “non-volatile memory,” subject to Apple’s right to revive those defenses and

14

counterclaims in the event of a remand.

15
16

The parties reserve their rights to challenge any constructions of the disputed claim terms
of the ’941 patent on appeal.

17

This is a final, appealable judgment.

18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
Dated: April 29, 2013
20
21

______________________________
Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers
United States District Court Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT
CASE NO. 11-CV-06357-YGR
sf-3274748

2