St. Clair Intellectual Property Consultants Inc. v. Acer Inc. et al

Filing 877

MEMORANDUM ORDER regarding the status of the remaining pending motions. Signed by Judge Leonard P. Stark on 3/29/13. Associated Cases: 1:09-cv-00354-LPS, 1:10-cv-00282-LPS(ntl)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
ST. CLAIR INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY CONSULTANTS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 09-354-LPS
(CONSOLIDATED)

v.

ACER, INC., et al.,
Defendants.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 10-282-LPS

V.

ST. CLAIR INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY CONSULTANTS, INC.,
Defendant.

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Pending before the Court are numerous motions in these consolidated cases. The Court
heard oral argument on many motions on March 27, 2013 and has today issued rulings on several
of the motions. The Court will proceed with respect to the remaining pending motions as
follows:
1.

With respect to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment that the [Fung]

Patents are Invalid for Inadequate Written Description (D.I. 653), which was argued at the
hearing, the Court is reserving judgment and needs no further written submissions.
2.

With respect to Defendants' Motion for Spoliation Sanctions Against Plaintiff

(D.I. 641),which was argued at the hearing, the Court requires additional briefing. Specifically,
the parties shall provide briefing on the applicability, if any, of the analysis in Bozic v. City of
Washington, Pa., 2012 WL 6050610 (W.D. Pa. Dec. 5, 2012), which was first mentioned at the
hearing. Defendants' brief, not to exceed five pages, is due on April 5; Plaintiffs answering
brief, not to exceed five pages, is due on April 12; and Defendants' reply brief, not to exceed two
pages, is due on April 16, 2013.
3.

With respect to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment ofNoninfringement

of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,710,929 and 5,758,175 (D.I. 692), which was argued at the hearing, the
Court requires additional briefing. Specifically, the parties shall provide supplemental briefing
on the proper construction of the claim term "I/O device" and address whether this motion
presents an issue of law or a question of fact. Defendants' brief, not to exceed ten pages, is due
on April 5; Plaintiffs answering brief, not to exceed ten pages, is due on April 12; and
Defendants' reply brief, not to exceed four pages, is due on April 16, 2013.
4.

The following motions were not argued at the hearing and remain pending:
a.

Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment ofNon-Infringement of U.S.
Patent Nos. 5,630,163 and 5,613,130 (D.I. 631),

b.

Toshiba's Motion for Summary Judgment on Willful Infringement (D.I.
633),

c.

St. Clair's Motion for Summary Judgment that the Alleged "Dell 316LT"
is Not Prior Art Against the Asserted Claims of the Fung Patents, Other
than Claim 20 of the '175 Patent and Claim 11 of the '929 Patent (D.I.
643),

2

d.

Intel's Motion for Summary Judgment ofNo Contributory Infringement or
Willfulness Liability Under the [Fung] Patents (D.I. 676),

e.

Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment ofNo Infringement and
Invalidity of '617 Patent (D.I. 685),

f.

Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment ofNoninfringement ofU.S.
Patent Nos. 5,892,959 and 6,079,025 (D.I. 688),

g.

Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment that Claim 2 of the '959
Patent is Invalid for Indefiniteness Under Section 112(2) (D.I. 690),

h.

Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment ofNoninfringement of the
Asserted Claims ofthe [Fung] Patents (D.I. 694),

1.

Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment that the Asserted Claims of
the '959 and '025 patents are Invalid Under Section 112 (D.I. 698),

J.

St. Clair's Motion for Summary Judgment that the Alleged "Intel386 SL
Superset" is Not Prior Art Against the Asserted Claims of the Fung
Patents (D.I. 654) and Defendants' Cross Motion for Summary Judgment
(D.I. 757),

k.

Microsoft's Motion for Summary Judgment that it is Not Liable for
Willful or Contributory Infringement (D.I. 328, C.A. No. 10-282),

1.

Defendants' Motion to Strike Portions ofthe Declarations of Ted Drake
and William Mangione-Smith and St. Clair's Untimely Infringement
Contentions (D.I. 465, C.A. No. 10-282), and

m.

St. Clair's Motion for Summary Judgment of Dismissal of the Lack of
3

'
1

J

Standing Defense by Plaintiff Microsoft Corporation (D.I. 467, C.A. No.
10-282).
The Court intends to schedule another hearing at which the parties will provide oral argument on
each of these pending motions.

March 29, 2013
Wilmington, Delaware

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

4