Cellspin Soft, Inc. v. GoPro, Inc.

Filing 72

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

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4

OAKLAND DIVISION

5
6

CELLSPIN SOFT, INC.
Plaintiff,

7

[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT
PURSUANT TO ORDER RE:
OMNIBUS MOTION TO DISMISS

v.

8
9

Case No. 17-cv-05939-YGR

GOPRO, INC.,
Defendant.

10
11

This action having come before the Court, and pursuant to the Court’s Order (Dkt. No. 70)

12
13

granting Defendant GoPro, Inc.’s (“GoPro”) Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 31) finding all asserted

14

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

15

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

16

therefore invalid pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 101—IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED AND ORDERED

17

that:

18

For the reasons set forth in the Court’s Order on April 3, 2018 (Dkt. No. 70), claims 1–4, 7,

19

9, 16–18, and 20–21 from the ’794 Patent, claims 1, 2, 4, 5, and 12–14 from the ’752 Patent, claims

20

1-3 from the ’847 Patent, and claims 1,3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 from

21

the ‘698 Patent are invalid pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 101.

22

The foregoing claims of the ‘698 Patent represent all pending claims at issue in this case.

23

WHEREFORE JUDGMENT is entered in this case in favor of Defendant GoPro and against

24

Plaintiff Cellspin Soft, Inc., rendering GoPro the prevailing party in the above-captioned action.

25
26

Dated: April 10, 2018

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

27
28
1

[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT; CASE NO. 17-CV-05939-YGR