Personalized User Model LLP v. Google Inc.

Filing 682

Letter to The Honorable Leonard P. Stark from Karen Jacobs regarding parties' proposals for how case should proceed - re 677 Opinion. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A and B)(Jacobs, Karen)

EXHIBIT A

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
PERSONALIZED USER MODEL, L.L.P.,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
GOOGLE, INC.,
)
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________________ )
GOOGLE, INC.,
)
)
Counterclaimant,
)
)
v.
)
)
PERSONALIZED USER MODEL, L.L.P.
)
and YOCHAI KONIG,
)
)
Counterclaim-Defendants.
)

C.A. No. 09-525 (LPS)

[PROPOSED] INTERIM JUDGMENT
WHEREAS this action came before the Court for a trial by jury on March 10, 2014. The
issues have been tried, and the jury rendered its verdict on March 20, 2014. The verdict was
accompanied by the verdict form (D.I. 666), a copy of which is attached hereto;
WHEREAS the parties moved for Judgment as a Matter of Law pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
50(a) (D.I. 656 and 669);
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1)

Judgment be and is hereby entered on the March 20, 2014 jury verdict in favor of

Google and against Plaintiff Personalized User Model (“PUM”) on PUM’s claim of infringement and
Google’s claim and defense of invalidity, as set out in the attached verdict form.
2)

Judgment as a matter of law be and is hereby entered in favor of Counterclaim

Defendant Dr. Yochai Konig (“Dr. Konig”) and against Counterclaim Plaintiff Google pursuant to

Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a) on Google’s breach of contract counterclaim. For the same reasons, judgment
is also entered in favor of Dr. Konig and PUM and against Google on Google’s counterclaims for a
declaration of ownership, constructive trust and conversion.
This Judgment is subject to modification following the Court's consideration of the parties'
post-trial motions.
IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED.

April _______, 2014

__________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

EXHIBIT B

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
PERSONALIZED USER MODEL, L.L.P.,
Plaintiff,
v.
GOOGLE INC.,
Defendant.
GOOGLE, INC.
Counterclaimant,
v.
PERSONALIZED USER MODEL, LLP and
YOCHAI KONIG
Counterdefendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C.A. No. 09-525-LPS

JUDGMENT

For reasons stated in the jury verdict of March 20, 2014:
IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment be and is hereby entered on behalf of
defendant Google Inc. as to no infringement of claim 1 or 22 of the U.S. Patent No. 6,981,040
(“‘040 patent”).
IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment be and is hereby entered on behalf of
defendant Google Inc. as to no infringement of claims 1, 3, 7, or 21 of U.S. Patent No. 7,685,276
(“‘276 patent”).

01980.51575/5830935.2

-1-

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment be and is hereby entered on behalf of
defendant Google Inc. that claim 1 of the ‘040 patent and claim 1 of the ‘276 patent are invalid
because they are anticipated and obvious.
IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment be and is hereby entered on behalf of
defendant Google Inc. that claim 22 of the ‘040 patent, and claims 3, 7, and 21 of the ‘276 patent
are invalid because they are obvious.
IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment be and is hereby entered on behalf of
defendant Google Inc. that Yochai Konig breached his employment agreement with SRI.
Therefore, PUM takes nothing by way of its patent infringement claims, and those claims
are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.