Personalized User Model LLP v. Google Inc.

Filing 689

JUDGMENT in favor of Google Inc. and against Personalized User Model LLP (See document for further details). Signed by Judge Leonard P. Stark on 4/17/14. (ntl)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

PERSONALIZED USER MODEL, L.L.P., )
)
Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendants, )
)
v.
)
)
GOOGLE, INC.,
)
)
Defendant/Counterclaimant.
)

Civ. No. 09-525-LPS

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. (See D.I. 666)
WHEREAS the parties moved for Judgment as a Matter of Law pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
P.50(a). (D.I. 656 and 669)
For reasons stated in the jury verdict of March 20, 2014:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment be and is hereby entered
on behalf of defendant Google, Inc. as to no infringement of claim 1 or claim 22 of the U.S.
Patent No. 6,981,040 ("'040 patent").
IT IS FURTHER 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").
IT IS FURTHER 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 FURTHER 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 FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that judgment be and is hereby entered
on behalf of defendant Google, Inc. that Google's breach of contract counterclaim was not timebarred, that Google had standing to sue Yochai Konig for breach of contract, that Dr. Konig
breached his employment agreement with SRI, and that Dr. Konig's invention was not protected
by Section 2870 of the California Labor Code.
Therefore, PUM takes nothing by way of its patent infringement claims, and those claims
are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
This Judgment is subject to modification following the Court's consideration of any posttrial motions that may be filed by any party.

April 17, 2014