American Institute of Physics et al v. Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A. et al

Filing 255

ORDER Adopting 250 Report and Recommendation; overruling 252 Objections; denying as moot 93 Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment; denying as moot 116 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; denying as moot 153 Motion for Summary Judgment ; granting 156 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 160 Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony; denying as moot 190 Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony; denying as moot 222 Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony; dismissing with prejudice 41 Amended Complaint. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 08/30/13. (KLL)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA American Institute of Physics, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., and Wiley Periodicals, Inc., Civil No. 12-528 (RHK/JJK) ORDER Plaintiffs, v. Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A., and John Doe Nos. 1-10, Defendants, v. The United States Patent and Trademark Office, Intervenor Defendant. Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Objections to United States Magistrate Judge Jeffrey J. Keyes’s July 30, 2013 Report and Recommendation. The Court has conducted a de novo review of the Report and Recommendation, the Objections thereto, and all of the files, records, and proceedings in this matter. That review satisfies the undersigned that Judge Keyes’s thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation is fully supported by the factual record before him and controlling legal principles. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1. Plaintiffs’ Objections (Doc. No. 252) are OVERRULED; 2. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 250) is ADOPTED; 3. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment on the Counterclaim of Intervening Defendant the United States Patent and Trademark Office (Doc. No. 93) is DENIED AS MOOT; 4. Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Establishing the Liability of Defendant Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A. for Copyright Infringement (Doc. No. 116) is DENIED AS MOOT; 5. Intervenor Defendant The United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Motion for Summary Judgment on its Fair Use Defense and Counterclaim (Doc. No. 153) is DENIED AS MOOT; 6. Schwegman’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 156) is GRANTED; 7. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude the Expert Witness Testimony of Jean-Pierre Dubé (Doc. No. 160) is DENIED; 8. Schwegman’s Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony, Report, and Declaration of Randall H. Victora (Doc. No. 190) is DENIED AS MOOT; 9. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude the Proposed Expert Testimony of Douglas Gary Lichtman (Doc. No. 222) is DENIED AS MOOT; and 10. This Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 41) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. Dated: August 30, 2013 s/Richard H. Kyle RICHARD H. KYLE United States District Judge

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?