Anascape, Ltd v. Microsoft Corp. et al

Filing 223

MOTION for Summary Judgment -- Defendants' Joint Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement of All Asserted Claims of the '525 Patent and Partial Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement of Claims 1-11, 21, 26-29 and 31 of the '700 Patent by Nintendo of America, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1# 2 Text of Proposed Order # 3 Certificate of Service)(Blank, James)

Anascape, Ltd v. Microsoft Corp. et al

Doc. 223

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION ANASCAPE, LTD. Plaintiff, v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, and NINTENDO OF AMERICA INC., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § Hon. Ron Clark Civil Action No. 9:06-CV-00158-RC

DEFENDANTS' JOINT MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT OF ALL ASSERTED CLAIMS OF THE `525 PATENT AND PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT OF CLAIMS 1-11, 21, 26-29 AND 31 OF THE `700 PATENT

NY\1387044.1

Dockets.Justia.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. II. III. IV. SUMMARY..........................................................................................1 UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS...........................................................1 ARGUMENT.........................................................................................2 CONCLUSION......................................................................................2

NY\1387044.1

I. SUMMARY This motion is based on Plaintiff, Anascape, Ltd.'s stipulation of Defendants, Nintendo of America Inc.'s ("Nintendo") and Microsoft Corporation's ("Microsoft") non-infringement of all asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,222,525 (the "`525 patent") and claims 1-11, 21, 26-29and 31 of U.S. Patent No. 6,906,700 (the "`700 patent"). (Specifically, as to the `525 Patent, claims 1, 5-6, and 12-20 were asserted against Microsoft, and claims 5, 12-17 and 19-20 were asserted against Nintendo, and as to the `700 Patent, claims 1-11, 26-29, and 31 were asserted against Microsoft, and claims 21, 26-27 and 31 were asserted against Nintendo.)1 II. UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS 1. Asserted claims 1, 5-6, and 12-20 of the `525 patent and 1-11, 21, 26-29, and 31

of the `700 patent (the "Claims") each contain as an element a "flexible membrane sheet." 2. The Court has construed "flexible membrane sheet" to mean "a thin, flat, non-

conductive material that can be easily bent into a three dimensional shape, and which includes circuitry and one or more sensors, or circuitry that functions as one or more sensors." See Doc. # 186 at 6. 3. Following the Court's Order construing the term "flexible membrane sheet," the

parties entered into a "Stipulation Regarding the Claim Term `Flexible Membrane Sheet'" dated February 11, 2008 (the "Stipulation"). A copy of the Stipulation is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 4. The Stipulation provides, in pertinent part:

"The undersigned parties to the above-captioned action hereby stipulate and agree that the products accused in the above-captioned action, including the Microsoft Xbox Controller, the Microsoft Xbox Controller S, the Nintendo GameCube Controller (both the wired GameCube controller and the Wavebird wireless GameCube controller), and the Nintendo Wii Classic Controller ("Accused
1

On March 13, 2008, Nintendo submitted a letter brief to the Court requesting permission to file this motion. Thereafter, Ms. Chen directed Nintendo and Microsoft to file this motion.
NY\1387044.1

Products"), do not include a "flexible membrane sheet" under the Court's construction of that term, as reflected in the Court's Order of Monday, February 4, 2008 (docket no. 186)." * * *

"[P]laintiff Anascape, Ltd. ("Anascape") hereby stipulates that, to the extent that the claim term "flexible membrane sheet" is construed in accordance with the Court's Order of Monday, February 4, 2008 (docket no. 186), the "flexible membrane sheet" limitation is not met in the Accused Products, and for this reason, Defendants Microsoft Corporation ("Microsoft") and Nintendo of America Inc. ("Nintendo") do not infringe, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, asserted claims 1-11, 21, 26-29, and 31 of U.S. Patent No. 6,906,700 and any asserted claim of U.S. Patent No. 6,222,525." * * *

"Based on the above stipulation, Microsoft and Nintendo will file a motion for partial summary judgment of non-infringement of the [flexible membrane sheet] Claims. Anascape's opposition will agree that under the Court's present construction of the term "flexible membrane sheet," there is no issue of fact that Microsoft and Nintendo do not infringe the [flexible membrane sheet] Claims." III. ARGUMENT Pursuant to the above-referenced stipulation, there is no fact issue that Defendants do not infringe the Claims based on the Court's construction of the term "flexible membrane sheet." Accordingly, Defendants are entitled to summary judgment of non-infringement of the Claims as a matter of law. IV. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Defendants respectfully requests that the Court grant summary judgment of non-infringement of all asserted claims of the `525 patent and partial summary judgment of non-infringement of asserted claims 1-11, 21, 26, and 31 of the `700 patent. Dated: February 27, 2008 Respectfully submitted, By:/s/ Lawrence L. Germer Texas Bar No. 07824000
NY\1387044.1

([e-mail]) Charles W. Goehringer, Jr. ([e-mail]) GERMER GERTZ L.L.P. 550 Fannin, Suite 400 P.O. Box 4915 Beaumont, Texas 77704 Tel.: [phone] Fax: [phone] Robert J. Gunther, Jr. ([e-mail]) WILMER HALE 399 Park Avenue New York, NY 10022 Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone] /s/ James S. Blank James S. Blank ([e-mail]) Sabrina Hassan ([e-mail]) LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 885 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022 Tel.: [phone] Fax: [phone] Robert W. Faris ([e-mail]) Joseph S. Presta ([e-mail]) NIXON & VANDERHYE, P.C. 1100 North Glebe Road, 8th Floor Arlington, VA 22201 Tel.: [phone] Fax: [phone] ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT AND COUNTERCLAIMANT NINTENDO OF AMERICA, INC. By: /s/ John D. Vandenberg_____________________ J. Christopher Carraway (admitted pro hac vice) [e-mail] Joseph T. Jakubek (admitted pro hac vice) [e-mail] Stephen J. Joncus (admitted pro hac vice) [e-mail] Richard D. Mc Leod (Bar No. 24026836)

NY\1387044.1

[e-mail] Derrick W. Toddy (admitted pro hac vice) [e-mail] John D. Vandenberg (admitted pro hac vice) [e-mail] KLARQUIST SPARKMAN, LLP 121 S.W. Salmon Street, Suite 1600 Portland, Oregon 97204 Telephone: [phone] J. Thad Heartfield (Bar No. 09346800) [e-mail] Law Offices of J. Thad Heartfield 2195 Dowlen Road Beaumont, Texas 77706 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 409-866-5789 Clayton E Dark Jr. (Bar No. 05384500) [e-mail] Clayton E Dark Jr., Law Office 207 E Frank Ave # 100 Lufkin, TX 75901 Telephone: [phone] Stephen McGrath, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice) MICROSOFT CORPORATION One Microsoft Way, Building 8 Redmond, Washington 98052-6399 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 425-706-7329 Attorneys for Defendant Microsoft Corporation

NY\1387044.1