throbber
Case 2:07-cv-00271-RSP Document 348 Filed 01/20/12 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: 19509
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 2:07-cv-271-RSP
`













`
`
`
`
`
`
`AMERANTH, INC.,
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`MENUSOFT SYSTEMS CORPORATION
`and CASH REGISTER SALES & SERVICE
`OF HOUSTON, INC. (dba CRS TEXAS)
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`JOINT STIPULATED MOTION FOR VACATUR
`OF INVALIDITY VERDICTS AND JUDGMENT
`
`
`
`Starbucks, Ex. 1088
`Starbucks v. Ameranth, CBM2015-00091
`
`

`
`Case 2:07-cv-00271-RSP Document 348 Filed 01/20/12 Page 2 of 4 PageID #: 19510
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Ameranth, Inc. (“Ameranth”) and Defendants Menusoft Systems Corp.
`
`(“Menusoft”) and Cash Register Sales & Service of Houston, Inc. (“CRS”), pursuant to Fed. R.
`
`Civ. P. 60(b), jointly submit this Stipulated Motion for Vacatur of Invalidity Verdicts and Judgment.
`
`Plaintiff Ameranth and Defendant Menusoft reached an agreement of settlement on October 13,
`
`2011 (“Settlement Agreement”) during a mandatory mediation session before Chief Federal Circuit
`
`Mediator James Amend. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the parties agreed to move this
`
`Court for an Order granting relief under Rule 60(b), and thereby vacating the verdicts and judgment of
`
`invalidity entered by this Court on September 21, 2010 (Dkt. Nos. 263, 265) and which were included
`
`within the scope of the appeal to the Federal Circuit of this case. To accomplish this objective of the
`
`parties’ settlement, on October 28, 2011, Ameranth, joined by Defendants Menusoft and CRS, moved
`
`this Court for an indicative ruling pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62.1 and Fed. R. App. P.
`
`12.1.
`
`On October 31, 2011, Chief District Court Judge David Folsom, upon consideration of the
`
`parties' motion for indicative ruling, indicated that if the Federal Circuit remanded the case on appeal to
`
`the district court to consider the parties’ joint motion for vacatur of the invalidity verdicts and judgment
`
`as a condition of their settlement, the Court would grant the motion for vacatur. (See Dkt. No. 332
`
`(Judge Folsom’s Order on Motion for Indicative Ruling)).
`
`The Federal Circuit has now remanded the case to this Court for entry of vacatur. (Dkt. No.
`
`347). Thus, the parties jointly request that an order of vacatur of the invalidity verdicts and judgment be
`
`entered by this Court. No reason exists for the Court to deviate from its expressed intent to enter an
`
`order of vacatur as stated in its indicative ruling. 1 A proposed Order consistent with the parties’ joint
`
`
`1 Two non-parties to this case have filed motions requesting entry of amicus briefs opposing vacatur.
`(Dkt. Nos. 333, 334). However, as detailed in Ameranth’s oppositions to those motions (Dkt. Nos. 335,
`336, 342, 343), neither party has provided a substantive basis for entry of their briefs or why this Court
`should deviate from its expressed intent to vacate the invalidity verdicts and judgment. The attempts by
`these non-parties to interfere in the present case should be rejected by the Court for a number of reasons
`as detailed in Ameranth’s oppositions including, inter alia, that the patent claims for which vacatur is
`1
`
`Starbucks, Ex. 1088
`Starbucks v. Ameranth, CBM2015-00091
`
`

`
`Case 2:07-cv-00271-RSP Document 348 Filed 01/20/12 Page 3 of 4 PageID #: 19511
`
`
`request is submitted herewith. When an Order of Vacatur has been entered, the parties will file
`
`appropriate papers dismissing the case against all Defendants as settled pursuant to the terms of the
`
`Settlement Agreement.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Michael C. Smith
`By:
`Michael C. Smith
`State Bar Number 18650410
`Email: michaelsmith@siebman.com
`Siebman, Burg, Phillips & Smith, L.L.P.
`113 East Austin Street
`Marshall, TX 75671
`(903) 938-8900 – Telephone
`(972) 767-4620 – Facsímile
`
`John W. Osborne
`josborne@osborneipl.com.com
`Osborne Law LLC
`33 Habitat Lane
`Cortlandt Manor, NY 10567
`(914) 714-5936 - Telephone
`(914) 734-7333 – Facsimile
`
`Peter N. Fill
`pfill@lockelord.com
`James W. Gould
`jgould@lockelord.com
`Steven M. Purdy
`spurdy@lockelord.com
`Peter H. Noh
`pnoh@lockelord.com
`Locke Lord LLP
`3 World Financial Center
`New York, NY 10281-2101
`(212) 415-8600 – Telephone
`(212) 303-2754 – Telecopier
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Ameranth, Inc.
`
`
`This 20th day of January, 2012.
`
`
`
`/s/ Otis W. Carroll, Jr.
`By:
`Otis W. Carroll, Jr.
`State Bar Number 03895700
`Email: fedserv@icklaw.com
`Ireland, Carroll & Kelley, PC
`6101 South Broadway, Suite 500
`Tyler, Texas 75703
`Telephone: (903) 561-1600
`Fax: (903) 581-1071
`
`George R. McGuire
`Email: gmcguire@bsk.com
`Bond Schoeneck & King, PLLC
`One Lincoln Center
`Syracuse, NY 13202-1355
`315/218-8515
`Fax: 315/218-8100
`
`Attorneys for Defendants Menusoft
`Systems Corp. and Cash Register
`Sales & Service of Houston, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`sought are not being asserted against these non-parties. The non-party motions are overt red herrings
`intended only to gain tactical advantages in other unrelated litigations.
`2
`
`Starbucks, Ex. 1088
`Starbucks v. Ameranth, CBM2015-00091
`
`

`
`Case 2:07-cv-00271-RSP Document 348 Filed 01/20/12 Page 4 of 4 PageID #: 19512
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that all counsel of record who are deemed to have to consented
`electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court’s
`CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3) this 20th day of January, 2012. Any other counsel
`of record will be served by facsimile transmission and/or first class mail.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Michael C. Smith
`
`Michael C. Smith
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Starbucks, Ex. 1088
`Starbucks v. Ameranth, CBM2015-00091

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