In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Tyler Division Bartex
ثبت نشده
چکیده
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION BARTEX RESEARCH, LLC § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:07-CV-385 § FEDEX CORP., § et al. § ORDER ADOPTING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION OPINION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE The above entitled and numbered civil action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge John D. Love pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. The Memorandum Opinion and Order of the Magistrate Judge (the “Opinion”), which contains his construction of disputed terms in U.S. Patent No. 6,666,377 (“the ‘377 patent”) (Doc. No. 124), has been presented for consideration. Plaintiff BarTex Research LLC (“Plaintiff”) objects to the Magistrate Judge’s claim construction and moves for reconsideration (Doc. No. 148). Defendants FedEx Corporation, FedEx Express Corporation, FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. and FedEx Kinko’s Office and Print Services n/k/a FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc. (“Defendants”) oppose Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. No. 151). For the following reasons, the Court is of the opinion that the Magistrate Judge’s construction of the disputed terms is correct. The Court hereby ADOPTS the Opinion of the United States Magistrate Judge as the opinion of this Court. Plaintiff’s objections are overruled and its motion for reconsideration is DENIED. DISCUSSION The Opinion construed the terms “scanning process,” “second,” “abbreviated,” and “personal identification information.” Plaintiff objects to the construction of each term.
منابع مشابه
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
LUX, INC.,)) Plaintiff,)) Civil Action No. 07-CV-520 v.)) BRIGHTBLUE CORPORATION,) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED)) Defendant.)
متن کاملIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
Google and Overture Services, Inc. (“Overture”). A First Amended Complaint was filed on May 14, 2004, and on November 29, 2004, Overture was dismissed as a defendant. Therefore, all references to the Complaint in this Opinion are to the First Amended Complaint, and only Google remains as a defendant. In a previous Memorandum Opinion discussed more fully below, the Court dismissed Google’s Motio...
متن کاملIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
Google and Overture Services, Inc. (“Overture”). A First Amended Complaint was filed on May 14, 2004, and on November 29, 2004, Overture was dismissed as a defendant. Therefore, all references to the Complaint in this Opinion are to the First Amended Complaint, and only Google remains as a defendant. In a previous Memorandum Opinion discussed more fully below, the Court dismissed Google’s Motio...
متن کاملSharlene Abrams United States District Court Northern District of Californi a San Jose Division
Farclla Braan & Martel LLP S . Francisco Douglas R . Young (State Bar No . 073248), dyoung@fbm .com C. Brandon Wisoff (State Bar No . 121930), [email protected] James C . Mann (State Bar No . 221603) [email protected] Farella Braun + Martel LLP 235 Montgomery Street, 17th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 954-4400 Facsimile: (415) 954-4480 Attorneys for Defendant SHARLENE ABRAMS UNITED S...
متن کامل