Bedrock Computer Technologies, LLC v. Softlayer Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 659

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS recommending #462 MOTION for Summary Judgment of Invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 5,893,120 filed by Google Inc., Match.Com LLC, MySpace Inc., Amazon.com Inc., Yahoo! Inc., AOL Inc, Softlayer Technologies, Inc., be denied; and #463 SEALED MOTION Joint Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgement re Non-Infringment of '120 Patent filed by Google Inc., Match.Com LLC, MySpace Inc., Amazon.com Inc., Yahoo! Inc., AOL Inc, Softlayer Technologies, Inc., be denied. Signed by Magistrate Judge John D. Love on 03/25/11. cc:attys 3-25-11(mll, )

Bedrock Computer Technologies, LLC v. Softlayer Technologies, Inc. et al

Doc. 659

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION BEDROCK COMPUTER, TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Plaintiff, v. SOFTLAYER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § §

No. 6:09cv269 LED-JDL JURY DEMANDED

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Before the Court is Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 5,893,120 (Doc. No. 462). Bedrock Computer Technologies, LLC ("Bedrock") has filed a response (Doc. No. 534) and Defendants have filed a reply (Doc. No. 573). Also before the Court is Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,893,120 (Doc. No. 463). Bedrock has filed its Response (Doc. No. 533), and Defendants have replied (Doc. No. 574). The Court heard argument on the Motions on March 17, 2011. Upon consideration of the parties' arguments, the Court RECOMMENDS that Defendants' Motions be DENIED. Within fourteen (14) days after receipt of the Magistrate Judge's Report, any party may serve and file written objections to the findings and recommendations contained in the Report. A party's failure to file written objections to the findings, conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy shall bar that party from de novo review by the district judge of those findings, conclusions and recommendations and, except on grounds of plain error, from appellate review of unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions

Dockets.Justia.com

. accepted and adopted by the district court. Douglass v. United States Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996).

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 25th day of March, 2011.

___________________________________ JOHN D. LOVE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2