Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al

Filing 1412

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Leonard Davis: Post-Verdict Motion Hearing held on 6/11/2012. (Court Reporter Jill McFadden.) (Attachments: # 1 Attorney Sign-In Sheets) (rlf, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION DATE: June 11, 2012 Court Reporter: Jill McFadden LEONARD DAVIS Judge Presiding Law Clerk: Allan Bullwinkel Court Administrator: Rosa L Ferguson EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED CIVIL ACTION NO: 6:09-CV-446 V POST-VERDICT MOTIONS HEARING ADOBE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS SEE SIGN-IN SHEETS On this day, came the parties by their attorneys and the following proceedings were had: OPEN: 1:55 pm ADJOURN: 4:35 pm TIME: MINUTES: 1:55 pm Case called. PARTIES ANNOUNCED READY. (SEE SIGN-IN SHEETS) Court addressed the parties on the Joint Motion to Correct the Judgment. Mr. Reines responded that the parties are in agreement. Court addressed the parties on Plaintiff’s Motion to De-designate. Mr. Bunt responded that it has not been resolved. Court asked that Mr. Bunt go forward and address. Mr. Bunt presented Plaintiff’s Motion to De-designate the Supplemental Validity Report of Defendant’s Validity Expert Richard Phillips (Dkt #1410). Ms. Doan responded. Court grants motion as the report was redacted. Court asked to hear motion on court costs. Mr. Jones presented the disputes on the Bill of Costs. Mr. McKool responded. Court will take matter under advisement. Court will move on the JMOL. Mr. Burgess presented Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion of Plaintiffs The Regents of the University of California and Eolas Technologies Incorporated for Judgment as a Matter of Law Under Rule 50(b) that the Asserted Claims of the Patents-In-Suit are not Invalid, or in the Alternative for a New Trial Under Rule 59 (Docket No. 1367). TIME: MINUTES: 3:15 pm Court in recess. 3:25 pm Hearing resumed. Ms. Doan responded to Plaintiff’s Motion. Mr. Burgess responded to the Plot.V issue. Ms. Doan continued her response. Mr. Lumish presented response as to the New Trial. Mr. Reines responded as to Mintz. Mr. Burgess replied. 4:35 pm There being nothing further, Court adjourned.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?