Cellspin Soft, Inc. v. Fitbit, Inc.

Filing 175

ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Plaintiff's Supplemental Response due by 2/24/2021. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 2/17/2021. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2021)

Download PDF
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 OAKLAND DIVISION 4 5 CELLSPIN SOFT, INC., 6 7 8 v. 11 14 v. 17 20 v. 23 26 27 Dkt. No. 128 Defendant. v. Case No. 17-cv-05932-YGR UNDER ARMOUR, INC., Dkt. No. 110 Defendant. v. Case No. 17-cv-05933-YGR FOSSIL GROUP, INC., ET AL., Dkt. No. 193 Defendants. v. Case No. 17-cv-05934-YGR GARMIN INTERNATIONAL, INC., ET AL., Dkt. No. 130 Defendants. 24 25 Case No. 17-cv-05931-YGR NIKE, INC., 21 22 Dkt. No. 130 Defendant. 18 19 Case No. 17-cv-05929-YGR MOOV, INC., 15 16 Dkt. No. 148 Defendant. 12 13 Case No. 17-cv-05928-YGR FITBIT, INC., 9 10 ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff, v. Case No. 17-cv-05936-YGR NIKON AMERICAS, INC., ET AL., Dkt. No. 135 Defendants. 28 1 1 On February 17, 2021, the Court held a hearing regarding Defendants’ motion for summary 2 judgment of patent invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 101. (See Case No. 17-cv-5933, Dkt. No. 193.) As 3 explained at the hearing, Plaintiff proposes a number of inventive concepts based on the combination of 4 elements that are otherwise individually addressed. (E.g., Dkt. No. 206-1 # 16-20.) Under Federal 5 Circuit precedent, the relevant inquiry is whether these elements are individually “well-understood, 6 routine, or conventional” and whether considering those elements as an ordered combination “add[s] 7 nothing . . . that is not already present when the [elements] are considered separately.” Chamberlain 8 Grp., Inc. v. Techtronic Indus. Co., 935 F.3d 1341, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (quoting Mayo Collaborative 9 Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 73 (2012)). 10 Accordingly, and as stated at the hearing, Plaintiff is ORDERED to submit additional briefing that 11 identifies each combination (i.e., the inventive concept based on the combination of inventive concepts 12 that Plaintiff asserts individually) and what the combination “adds” to the analysis beyond consideration 13 of the individual concepts. The Court will order additional briefing to address the substance of the 14 allegations if necessary. Failure to identify additional inventiveness based on the combination will be 15 deemed acquiescence that the conventionality of that combination depends on the conventionality of the 16 constituent concepts. Plaintiff shall file the supplement briefing no later than February 24, 2021. 17 18 19 20 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 17, 2021 ______________________________________ YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?