throbber
Case: 1:05-cv-04088 Document #: 558 Filed: 11/15/11 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:9337
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`EASTERN DIVISION
`
`Rosenthal Collins Group, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`Trading Technologies International, Inc.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`Civil Action No. 05 C 04088
`
`Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman
`
`Magistrate Judge Young B. Kim
`
`CONSENT JUDGMENT
`
`As a result of settlement of this action by virtue of a settlement agreement
`
`between the parties dated November 9, 2011 ("Settlement Agreement") (a redacted copy
`
`of which is attached as Exhibit 1 hereto) which shall become effective upon entry of this
`
`Consent Judgment and the entry of a Consent Judgment filed in Civil Action No. 10 C
`
`929 and upon consent of Defendant, Trading Technologies International, Inc. ("TT") and
`
`Plaintiff, Rosenthal Collins Group, LLC ("RCG"), judgment is hereby entered against
`
`RCG upon TT's Counterclaims, and it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and
`
`DECREED that:
`
`1.
`
`RCG commenced this action for, inter alia, a declaratory judgment of non-
`
`infringement and invalidity against TT on July 15, 2005. TT filed counterclaims against
`
`RCG on August 23, 2005. TT's counterclaims allege infringement of U.S. Patent Nos.
`
`6,766,304 ("304 patent") and 6,772,132 ("132 patent"). RCG's declaratory judgment
`
`claims also relate to the '304 and' 132 patents. RCG ~rresei~~-f!}fbr~ir;wed a copy of
`'·.]~) )~t:l
`
`the Counterclaims filed by TT in this action.
`
`2 S : II WV S l AON II OZ
`
`1
`
`TRADING TECH EXHIBIT 2079
`TD Ameritrade v. Trading Technologies
`CBM2014-00136
`
`Page 1 of 4
`
`

`

`Case: 1:05-cv-04088 Document #: 558 Filed: 11/15/11 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:9338
`
`2.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over the parties to this action and over the subject
`
`matter of the Complaint.
`
`3.
`
`TT is the sole and exclusive owner of the patents-in-suit asserted by TT, and has
`
`the right to sue upon, and recover damages for past infringement and enjoin future
`
`infringement of the patents-in-suit.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`All claims ofthe '304 and '132 patents are valid and enforceable.
`
`RCG has infringed the '304 and '132 patents under 35 U.S.C. Section 271 by
`
`making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing and/or otherwise distributing
`
`electronic trading software that includes what RCG has called the ABV window, which
`
`was the subject of summary judgment proceedings before this Court (Dkt. Nos. 157, 158,
`
`200, 201, 202, 258, 259, 290 and 313) and was included in RCG's Onyx®, Onyx® 2,
`
`Onyx® Pro, and RCG Spreader software. Documentation and a copy of a web-based
`
`tutorial on a DVD describing some these products are included in Exhibit 2.
`
`6.
`
`Defendant RCG, its officers, agents, servants, employees, and other persons who
`
`are in active concert or participation with RCG (including its directors, partners,
`
`members, affiliates, subsidiaries, assigns, successors-in-interest to the extent permitted by
`
`Fed. R. Civ. P. 65) are hereby permanently enjoined (unless expressly permitted by TT)
`
`during the terms of the '304 and '132 patents from infringing the '304 and '132 patents,
`
`including, without limitation, by the making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing,
`
`and otherwise distributing in the United States the electronic trading software products
`
`referred to in paragraph 5 above. This injunction applies, inter alia, to the use of the
`
`electronic trading software products referred to in paragraph 5 above for electronically
`
`trading any item (e.g., futures, options, equities, fixed-income products, etc.).
`
`2
`
`Page 2 of 4
`
`

`

`Case: 1:05-cv-04088 Document #: 558 Filed: 11/15/11 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:9339
`
`7.
`
`Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, RCG has agreed to pay to TT an amount
`
`(specified in the Settlement Agreement) in settlement of TT' s claims, which includes the
`
`fine assessed against RCG in the Court's order dated Feb. 23, 2011. RCG has no further
`
`obligations to make any payment to the Court.
`
`8.
`
`The Settlement Agreement resolves all claims in this action. Accordingly, RCG's
`
`counts in its complaint are hereby dismissed with prejudice.
`
`9.
`
`This Court shall retain jurisdiction over this case for purposes of enforcing the
`
`Consent Judgment and the Settlement Agreement between the parties pursuant to which
`
`the Consent Judgment is filed.
`
`10.
`
`The right to enforce this Consent Judgment shall transfer to any successor-in-
`
`interest to any party.
`
`11.
`
`The Clerk of the Court is hereby ordered to release all funds held in Escrow in the
`
`Court's registry fund pursuant to Judge Kim's July 21, 2010 order to TT. Otherwise,
`
`each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys' fees.
`
`[Signatures on Following Page]
`
`3
`
`Page 3 of 4
`
`

`

`Case: 1:05-cv-04088 Document #: 558 Filed: 11/15/11 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:9340
`
`SO ORDERED
`
`Dated:
`
`trk:_/t;
`I I
`
`AGREED TO:
`
`Dated : _
`
`__J)L.LI--j/1-L, --'-s-l-/_,_t-'-1 __
`
`on Coleman
`es District Court Judge
`
`LeifR. Sigmond, Jr. (I No. 6204980)
`Matthew J. Sampson (ID No. 6207606)
`McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP
`300 South Wacker Drive
`Chicago, IL 60606
`Tel.: (312) 913-0001
`Fax: (312) 913-0002
`
`Attorneys for Defendant
`TRADING TECHNOLOGIES
`INTERNATIONAL, INC.
`
`William F. Abrams (SBN 88805)
`Bingham McCutchen LLP
`1900 University A venue
`East Palo Alto, CA 94303-2223
`Telephone: 650.849.4880
`Facsimile: 650.849.4800
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`ROSENTHAL COLLINS GROUP, LLC
`
`Page 4 of 4
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket