CARDIONET, INC. v. THE SCOTTCARE CORPORATION et al

Filing 210

ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION THERETO, AND DEFENDANTS' REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION IS GRANTED AS OUTLINED HEREIN. SIGNED BY HONORABLE PETRESE B. TUCKER ON 7/12/18. 7/13/18 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND EMAILED TO COUNSEL.(jaa, ) Modified on 7/13/2018 (jaa, ).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CARDIONET, LLC, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
THE SCOTTCARE CORPORATION,
et al.,
Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 12-2516

ORDER
AND NOW, this __12th____ day of July, 2018, upon consideration of Defendants’
Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings Or, In The Alternative, For Summary Judgment (Doc.
192), Plaintiffs’ Response In Opposition thereto (Doc. 207), and Defendants’ Reply In Support
Of Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings Or In The Alternative, For Summary Judgment, That
The ‘850 And ‘996 Patents Are Patent Ineligible Under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Doc. 208), IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED that Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED. 1
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion To Attach Caselaw As An
Exhibit To Its Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings Or In The Alternative, For Summary
Judgment, That The ‘850 And ‘996 Patents Are Patent Ineligible Under 35 U.S.C. § 101 [] (Doc.
204) is GRANTED.

BY THE COURT:
/s/ Petrese B. Tucker
____________________________
Hon. Petrese B. Tucker, U.S.D.J.
1

This Order accompanies the Court’s Memorandum dated July __12___, 2018.