`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`GOOGLE LLC,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`SONOS, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`No. C 20-06754 WHA
`
`
`
`ORDER RE MOTION FOR
`RECONSIDERATION
`
`During our patent showdown procedure, Sonos moved for summary judgment of
`
`infringement of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,848,885. In opposition, Google argued that
`
`claim 1 of the ’885 patent was invalid. Specifically, Google argued the claim covered
`
`unpatentable subject matter and the patent lacked written description support.
`
`The July 2022 order on summary judgment rejected both of Google’s invalidity
`
`arguments (Dkt. No. 309). Google was then ordered to show cause as to why summary
`
`judgment should not be entered in favor of Sonos on the issue of validity. Google responded
`
`by raising new invalidity theories based on anticipation and obviousness. A subsequent
`
`October 2022 order entered summary judgment in favor of Sonos, ruling that Google had
`
`waived its back-up invalidity theories by not raising them in its opposition (Dkt. No. 382).
`
`Google now moves for reconsideration of the October 2022 order. Relying on Mikkelsen
`
`Graphic Engineering, Inc. v. Zund America, Inc., 541 F. App’x 964 (Fed. Cir. 2013), Google
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
`
`Case 3:20-cv-06754-WHA Document 539 Filed 03/02/23 Page 2 of 2
`
`
`
`asserts that it was under no obligation to raise all of its invalidity theories at summary
`
`judgment because Sonos never moved for summary judgment of no invalidity.
`
`Upon review, this order agrees that Mikkelsen is on point and that it cautions against
`
`entering summary judgment against non-movants in like circumstances. See id. at 972.
`
`Therefore, Google’s motion is GRANTED. The Court’s prior ruling of summary judgment in
`
`favor of Sonos as to the validity of claim 1 of the ’885 patent is hereby withdrawn (Dkt. No.
`
`382). The Court’s other findings as to that claim on summary judgment are not changed by
`
`this order (Dkt. No. 309).
`
`Both parties may submit a memo of up to five pages by MONDAY, MARCH 6, at 12:00
`
`P.M., stating their views on how to proceed on the issues in the pending summary judgment
`
`motions given this tardy ruling.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`Dated: March 2, 2023.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`WILLIAM ALSUP
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`2
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
