`
`M O R R I S , N I C H O L S , A R S H T & T U N N E L L L L P
`1201 NO R TH M AR KE T S TR E ET
`P.O. B O X 1347
`W I L M IN G TO N, DE L AWARE 19899-1347
`
`(302) 658-9200
`(302) 658-3989 FAX
`
`JACK B. BLUMENFELD
`
`(302) 351-9291
`
`(302) 425-3012 FAX
`
`jblumenfeld@mnat.com
`
`
`
`The Honorable Richard G. Andrews
`United States District Court
` for the District of Delaware
`844 North King Street
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`
`January 24, 2018
`
`VIA ELECTRONIC FILING
`
`Re:
`
`Acceleration Bay LLC; C.A. Nos. 16-453 (RGA); 16-454 (RGA); and 16-455 (RGA)
`
`Dear Judge Andrews:
`
`We write on behalf of Defendants to advise Your Honor of a remaining dispute
`related to the [Proposed] Second Supplemental Claim Construction Order (D.I. 430 in C.A.
`16-453) (“Proposed Order”) submitted by the parties yesterday. The Parties’ respective positions
`are contained within the Proposed Order; however, the Proposed Order itself does not highlight
`that there is a dispute or provide any context for that dispute.
`
`Regarding Terms 24, 25, 26 and 28, the Parties had previously disputed whether
`or not the respective preambles were limiting. The Court resolved that issue, finding that the
`preambles are limiting. See D.I. 422. As a result, the Proposed Order states that each of the
`preambles of these terms is limiting. In addition, the Court has found that the limiting preamble
`of Term 24 is indefinite. See D.I. 423, at 14-17. Plaintiff refuses to acknowledge that this
`limiting indefinite preamble renders the claims in which it appears (i.e., claims 19-24 of the ‘634
`patent) invalid. Thus, in the Proposed Order, the parties state their respective positions on this
`issue for Term 24. Defendants ask the Court to resolve this dispute when considering the
`Proposed Order. Defendants submit that these claims are invalid and should not remain a part of
`the case after the Court has found them to contain an indefinite limitation.
`
`
`
`Respectfully,
`
`/s/ Jack B. Blumenfeld
`
`Jack B. Blumenfeld (#1014)
`
`
`JBB/rah
`cc:
`Clerk of Court (Via Hand Delivery)
`
`All Counsel of Record (Via Electronic Mail)
`
`
`
`
`
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
