Mformation Technologies, Inc. v. Research in Motion Limited et al
Filing
1032
ORDER REQUESTING FURTHER BRIEFING. Briefing due by 7/27/2012. Motion Hearing set for 8/6/2012 09:00 AM in Courtroom 9, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Chief Judge James Ware. Signed by Chief Judge James Ware on July 17, 2012. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/17/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
NO. C 08-04990 JW
Mformation Techs., Inc.,
11
ORDER REQUESTING FURTHER
BRIEFING
Plaintiff,
v.
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
Research in Motion Ltd., et al.,
13
Defendants.
14
/
The parties are currently scheduled to appear before the Court on August 6, 2012 at 9 a.m.1
15
16
for a hearing on post-trial Motions. In preparing for this hearing, the Court finds that it would
17
benefit from additional briefing from the parties on two issues. Accordingly, on or before July 27,
18
2012, the parties shall each file a single simultaneous brief addressing the following issues:
19
A.
Evidence re. Transmission of the Contents of the Mailbox
20
The Court construed the language of Claim 1 to mean that “delivering” a command from the
21
server had to be performed in a sequence of recited sub-steps. The first sub-step requires “without a
22
request from the wireless device . . . establishing a connection between the wireless device and the
23
server . . . wherein the connection is established based on a threshold condition.” The Court
24
construed this language to mean that when performing this sub-step, a connection must be made by
25
the server with the wireless device.
26
27
1
28
Please note that this time represents a modification of the Court’s July 13, 2012 Minute
Order. (See Docket Item No. 1025.)
1
The second recited sub-step in the “delivering” step is “transmitting the contents of the
2
mailbox from the server to the wireless device.” The Court construed the claim language to mean
3
that the “establishing a connection” sub-step must be completed before the “transmitting the
4
contents of the mailbox” sub-step can commence. Thus, under the Court’s construction, a
5
connection between the server and the wireless device must be established before transmission of a
6
command is commenced.
7
In light of the Court’s construction, the parties are directed to point to the evidence produced
8
during Plaintiff’s case-in-chief which shows that a command is transmitted from the Blackberry
9
Enterprise Server to the Blackberry handheld device after a connection has been established between
the server and the handheld device.2
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
B.
Anticipation
12
The jury returned a verdict finding that: (1) Claims 1 and 6 of the ‘917 Patent are not
13
anticipated, and that (2) Claims 21-25 of the ‘917 Patent are anticipated. (See Docket Item No. 1026
14
at 9.) However, Claims 6, 21-25 are dependent on Claim 1.
15
The parties are directed to address the issue of whether the jury verdict is inconsistent,
16
insofar as the jury found that the independent Claim 1 of the ‘917 Patent is not anticipated, but that
17
claims that depend on that independent claim are anticipated.3 The parties shall also address any
18
course of action they would ask the Court to take with respect to this verdict.
19
20
Dated: July 17, 2012
JAMES WARE
United States District Chief Judge
21
22
23
24
25
2
26
3
27
28
In their briefing, the parties shall clearly quote and cite to the trial transcript.
See, e.g., Duhn Oil Tool, Inc. v. Cooper Cameron Corp., No. 1:05-CV-1411-MLH, 2012
WL 604138, at *4 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2012) (stating that “[i]f an independent claim is not
anticipated, any claims that depend upon that claim cannot be anticipated”) (citations omitted).
2
1
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:
2
Aaron D. Charfoos acharfoos@kirkland.com
Allen A. Arntsen aarntsen@foley.com
Amardeep Lal Thakur athakur@foley.com
Christopher R. Liro christopher.liro@kirkland.com
Eugene Goryunov egoryunov@kirkland.com
Jessica Christine Kaiser jessica.kaiser@kirkland.com
Justin E. Gray jegray@foley.com
Linda S. DeBruin ldebruin@kirkland.com
Lisa Marie Noller lnoller@foley.com
Marc Howard Cohen marc.cohen@kirkland.com
Maria A. Maras maria.maras@kirkland.com
Meredith Zinanni meredith.zinanni@kirkland.com
Michael Anthony Parks mparks@thompsoncoburn.com
Michael Daley Karson michael.karson@kirkland.com
Michael S Feldberg michael.feldberg@allenovery.com
Shawn Edward McDonald SEMcDonald@foley.com
Tiffany Patrice Cunningham tiffany.cunningham@kirkland.com
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
Dated: July 17, 2012
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
By:
/s/ JW Chambers
William Noble
Courtroom Deputy
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?