Prism Technologies v. Sprint Spectrum L.P.

Filing 469

ORDER - This matter is before the Court on: 1) Joint stipulation (Filing No. 427 ); 2) Sprint Spectrum's motion to seal courtroom (Filing No. 429 ); 3) Prism Technologies' motion to quash Sprint's trial subpoena to Hussein Enan ( Filing No. 434 ); 4) Sprint Spectrum's motion for judgment as a matter of law of no infringement under Rule 50(a) (Filing No. 445 ); and 5) Prism's motion for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(a) (Filing No. 456 ). The Court has reviewed the matters and notes that the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1) The joint stipulation of the parties is approved and adopted; 2) The motion to seal the courtroom is denied as moot. 3) The plaintiff's motion (Filing No. 434 ) to quash the trial subpoena of Mr. Hussein Enan is moot as defendant has orally withdrawn its subpoena. 4) Sprint Spectrums motion for judgment as a matter of law of no infringement under Rule 50(a) is denied; and 5) Prisms motion for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(a) is denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (GJG )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
PRISM TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P., D/B/A
)
SPRINT PCS,
)
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________)

8:12CV123

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on:
1) Joint stipulation (Filing No. 427);
2) Sprint Spectrum’s motion to seal courtroom (Filing
No. 429);
3) Prism Technologies’ motion to quash Sprint’s trial
subpoena to Hussein Enan (Filing No. 434);
4) Sprint Spectrum’s motion for judgment as a matter of
law of no infringement under Rule 50(a) (Filing No. 445); and
5) Prism’s motion for judgment as a matter of law
pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(a) (Filing No. 456).
The Court has reviewed the matters and notes that the
jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED:
1) The joint stipulation of the parties is approved and
adopted;

2) The motion to seal the courtroom is denied as moot.
3) The plaintiff’s motion (Filing No. 434) to quash the
trial subpoena of Mr. Hussein Enan is moot as defendant has
orally withdrawn its subpoena.
4) Sprint Spectrum’s motion for judgment as a matter of
law of no infringement under Rule 50(a) is denied; and
5) Prism’s motion for judgment as a matter of law
pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(a) is denied.
DATED this 24th day of June, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lyle E. Strom
____________________________
LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge
United States District Court

-2-