Cellspin Soft, Inc. v. Garmin International, Inc. et al

Filing 67

JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 4/10/18. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/10/2018)

4/10/2018

7

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

8

C

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

R NIA

o ge r s

FO

S

ER

nzalez R

LI

Attorney for Defendants Garmin
International, Inc., Garmin USA, Inc.

onne Go
Judge Yv

H

6

RT

5

NO

4

TED

GRAN

A

3

UNIT
ED

2

Rachael D. Lamkin (Cal Bar No. 246066)
Lamkin IP Defense
100 Pine St., Suite 1250
San Francisco, CA 94111
916.747.6091
[e-mail]

RT
U
O

1

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA,

10

OAKLAND DIVISION

11
12
13

CELLSPIN SOFT, INC.,

14

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 4:17-cv-05934-YGR

15
16
17
18
19
20

v.
GARMIN INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
GARMIN USA, INC.

PROPOSED FORM OF JUDGMENT
PURSUANT TO ORDER RE: OMNIBUS
MOTION TO DISMISS & GARMIN’S
MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE
PLEADINGS
Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers

Defendants.

21
22

Pursuant to the Court’s Order on April 3, 2018 (Dkt. No. 65) directing Defendants to

23

file a proposed form of judgment based on the Court’s Order finding the asserted claims of

24

U.S. Patent Nos. 8,738,794 (“the ’794 patent”); 8,892,752 (“the ’752 patent”); 9,749,847

25

(“the 847 patent”) and 9,258,698 (the “’698 Patent”) (collectively, “the Asserted Patents”)

26

invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Defendants Garmin International, Inc. and Garmin USA, Inc.

27

(“Garmin”) respectfully submit the following proposed judgment, attached as Exhibit A, the

28

1

1

form of which has been mostly approved by Plaintiff Cellspin Soft, Inc. It should be noted

2

that Plaintiff Cellspin Soft, Inc. objected to a single sentence of the content of Garmin’s

3

proposed order: “rendering Garmin the prevailing party in the above-captioned action”.

4

Cellspin stated that it “does not dispute that Garmin will be the prevailing party” but says

5

that the language is extraneous. Garmin disagrees and believes the statement is simply

6

accurate. Other than that single sentence, the Parties agree on the form and content of the

7

attached proposed order.

8
9
10

Respectfully submitted,

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Rachael D. Lamkin
Lamkin IP Defense
100 Pine St. Suite 1250
San Francisco, CA 94111
916.747.6091
[e-mail]
Attorney for Defendants

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

EXHIBIT A

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA,

10

OAKLAND DIVISION

11
12
13
14

CELLSPIN SOFT, INC.,
Plaintiff,

15
16
17
18

v.
GARMIN INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
GARMIN USA, INC.

19
20

CASE NO. 4:17-cv-05934-YGR
PROPOSED FORM OF JUDGMENT
PURSUANT TO ORDER RE: OMNIBUS
MOTION TO DISMISS & GARMIN’S
MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE
PLEADINGS
Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers

Defendants.

21
22
23

This action having come before the Court, and pursuant to the Court’s Order (Dkt. No.

24

65) granting Garmin International, Inc. and Garmin, USA, Inc’s (“Garmin’s”) Motion to

25

Dismiss and Motion For Judgment On the Pleadings (Dkt. Nos. 27, 52) finding all asserted

26

claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,738,794 (the “’794 Patent”), 8,892,752 (the “’752 Patent”),

27

9,749,847 (the “’847 Patent”) and 9,258,698 (the “’698 Patent”) directed to patent-ineligible

28

4

1

subject matter and therefore invalid pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 101—IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED

2

AND ORDERED that:

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

For the reasons set forth in the Court’s Order on April 3, 2018 (Dkt. No. 65), claims 1–
4, 7, 9, 16–18, and 20–21 from the ’794 Patent, claims 1, 2, 4, 5, and 12–14 from the ’752
Patent, claims 1-3 from the ’847 Patent, and claims 1, 3–5, 7-8, 10–13, 15–20 from the ’698
Patent are invalid pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 101.
The foregoing claims of the ’794, ’752, ’847 and ’698 Patents represent all pending
claims at issue in this case.
WHEREFORE JUDGMENT is entered in this case in favor of Defendant Garmin and
against Plaintiff Cellspin Soft, Inc., rendering Garmin the prevailing party in the abovecaptioned action.

13
14
15

Dated: _______________, 2018
April 10

______________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5