TRUEPOSITION, INC. v. LM ERICSSON TELEPHONE COMPANY et al

Filing 210

ORDER THAT UPON CONSIDERATION OF PLAINTIFF TRUEPOSITION, INC'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADING CONCERNING THE COUNTERCLAIMS AND CERTAIN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES OF DEFENDANT THIRD GENERATION PARTNERSHIP PROJECT 186 , AND THE RESPONSE AND REPLY THERETO, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE MOTION IS GRANTED. DEFENDANT THIRD GENERATION PARTNERSHIP PROJECT'S COUNTERCLAIM COUNTS I, II, III, IV ARE DISMISSED; COUNTERCLAIM COUNTS I, III, AND IV, ARE STRICKEN AS REDUNDANT AND LEGALLY INSUFFICIENT; AND THE REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO AMEND IS DENIED AS FUTILE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE ROBERT F. KELLY ON 10/9/13. 10/9/13 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(ti, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

TRUEPOSITION, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
LM ERICSSON TELEPHONE COMPANY
(TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON),
QUALCOMM, INC.,
ALCATEL-LUCENT USA, INC.,
EUROPEAN TELECOMMUNICATIONS
STANDARDS INSTITUTE and
THIRD GENERATION PARTNERSHIP
PROJECT a/k/a 3GPP,
Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION

No. 11-4574

ORDER
AND NOW, this 9th day of October, 2013, upon consideration of Plaintiff
TruePosition, Inc.’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Concerning the Counterclaims and
Certain Affirmative Defenses of Defendant Third Generation Partnership Project (Doc. No. 186),
and the Response and Reply thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED.
IT FURTHER ORDERED that:
1.

Defendant Third Generation Partnership Project’s Counterclaim Counts I,
II, III and IV are DISMISSED;

2.

Defendant Third Generation Partnership Project’s Affirmative Defenses
thirteen, fourteen and fifteen, which are based upon the same grounds as
Counterclaim Counts I, III and IV, are STRICKEN as redundant and
legally insufficient; and

3.

Defendant Third Generation Partnership Project’s request for leave to
amend is DENIED as futile.

BY THE COURT

/s/ Robert F. Kelly
ROBERT F. KELLY
SENIOR JUDGE

2