AdvanceMe Inc v. RapidPay LLC

Filing 249

RESPONSE in Opposition re 232 SEALED PATENT MOTION AdvanceMe's Objections to Defendants' Evidence ISO Their Second Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Proposed Order filed by AdvanceMe Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Denying Defendants' Second Motion for Partial Summary Judgment)(Edelman, Michael)

AdvanceMe Inc v. RapidPay LLC

Doc. 249 Att. 1

Case 6:05-cv-00424-LED

Document 249

Filed 05/02/2007

Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION ADVANCEME, INC., Plaintiff , v. RAPIDPAY LLC, BUSINESS CAPITAL CORPORATION, FIRST FUNDS, LLC, MERCHANT MONEY TREE, INC., REACH FINANCIAL, LLC, and FAST TRANSACT, INC. d/b/a SIMPLE CASH, Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § § § §

CASE NO. 6:05-CV-424 LED

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' SECOND MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF PATENT INVALIDITY (D.E. 232)

CAME ON FOR CONSIDERATION Defendants' FIRST FUNDS LLC, MERCHANT MONEY TREE, INC. and REACH FINANCIAL, LLC (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Defendants"), Second Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Patent Invalidity (D.E. 232). The Court finds that there is a genuine issue of material fact precluding the entry of partial summary judgment. Therefore, the Court DENIES Defendants' Second Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Invalidity.

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' SECOND MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF PATENT INVALIDITY

1

CASE NO.6:05-CV-424

Dockets.Justia.com