Eolas Technologies Incorporated v. Adobe Systems Incorporated et al

Filing 1417

AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT. Claims 1 and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 5,838,906 are found to be invalid. Claims 1, 3, 10, 16, 18, 20, 22, 36, 38, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,599,985 are found to be invalid. Accordingly, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiffs take nothing from Amazon.com Inc.; Google Inc.; J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc.; Yahoo! Inc.; and YouTube, LLC and that all pending motions are DENIED. Plaintiffs claims for infringement are dismissed with prejudice based on Defendants invalidity affirmative defense, and Defendants counterclaims other than for invalidity are hereby dismissed without prejudice as moot. Defendants costs of court should be taxed against Plaintiffs. The parties are directed to the Standing Order Regarding Bill of Costs on the Courts website. Signed by Judge Leonard Davis on 07/19/12. cc:attys 7-20-12(mll, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

EOLAS TECHNOLOGIES
INCORPORATED and
THE REGENTS OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
ADOBE SYSTEMS, INC., AMAZON.COM
INC., CDW CORPORATION, CITIGROUP
INC., THE GO DADDY GROUP, INC.,
GOOGLE INC., J.C. PENNEY
CORPORATION, INC., STAPLES, INC.,
YAHOO! INC., AND YOUTUBE, LLC.,

CASE NO. 6:09-CV-446

Defendants.
AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT
The Invalidity and Inequitable Conduct trial was tried in this action with the undersigned
presiding, and the jury has reached a verdict regarding invalidity.
It is ORDERED that:


Claims 1 and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 5,838,906 are found to be invalid.



Claims 1, 3, 10, 16, 18, 20, 22, 36, 38, 40, and 42 of U.S. Patent No. 7,599,985
are found to be invalid.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiffs take
nothing from Amazon.com Inc.; Google Inc.; J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc.; Yahoo! Inc.; and
YouTube, LLC (“Defendants”) and that all pending motions are DENIED.
It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiffs’ claims for
infringement are dismissed with prejudice based on Defendants’ invalidity affirmative defense,
and Defendants’ counterclaims other than for invalidity are hereby dismissed without prejudice
as moot.
1
McKool 443729v1

It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED, that Defendants’ costs of
court should be taxed against Plaintiffs.

The parties are directed to the Standing Order

Regarding Bill of Costs on the Court’s website.

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 19th day of July, 2012.

__________________________________
LEONARD DAVIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

McKool 443729v1