Polaris IP, LLC v. Google Inc. et al

Filing 158

ORDER denying 37 Motion to Dismiss; denying 39 Motion to Dismiss; denying 40 Motion to Dismiss; denying 41 Motion for More Definite Statement; denying 42 Motion for More Definite Statement; denying 43 Motion for More Definite Statement; denying 43 Motion to Stay; denying 43 Motion to Strike. For the reasons stated herein. Signed by Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham on 9/23/08. (ch, )

Polaris IP, LLC v. Google Inc. et al

Doc. 158

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION POLARIS IP, LLC vs. (1) GOOGLE INC.; (2) YAHOO! INC.; (3) AMAZON.COM, INC.; (4) A9.COM, INC.; (5) BORDERS, INC.; (6) BORDERS GROUP, INC.; (7) AOL LLC; (8) AMERICAN ONLINE, INC.; (9) IAC/INTERACTIVE CORP; AND (10) IAC SEARCH AND MEDIA, INC. § § § § § § § § § § § § § § ORDER Before the Court are Defendants' Motions (Nos. 37, 39, 40) to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for a More Definite Statement, to Strike, and to Stay Discovery. For the reasons stated below, the undersigned denies the Motions to Dismiss and the Motion for a More Definite Statement, to Strike, and to Stay Discovery. In FotoMedia v. AOL, the defendants asked this Court to heighten the pleading standards for willful infringement and indirect infringement claims in light of Bell Atlantic v. Twombly. See FotoMedia Technologies, LLC v. AOL, LLC, 2008 WL 4135906 (E.D. Tex. 2008), Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2008). The Defendants in this case are asking the Court to impose similar, heightened standards. In FotoMedia, this Court rejected that request in light of a recent Federal Circuit decision. FotoMedia, 2008 WL 4135906, McZeal v. Sprint Nextel Corp., 501 F.3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2007). For the same reasons as discussed in FotoMedia, the Court denies Defendants' Motion.

CASE NO. 2:07-CV-371-CE

Dockets.Justia.com

SIGNED this 23rd day of September, 2008.

___________________________________ CHARLES EVERINGHAM IV UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2