`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
`CENTRAL DIVISION
`
`
`
`EAGLE VIEW TECHNOLOGIES, INC., and
`PICTOMETRY INTERNATIONAL CORP.,
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’
`UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
`RELY ON CLAIMS NOT IDENTIFIED
`IN INITIAL INFRINGEMENT
`CONTENTIONS (DOC. NO. 100)
`
`Case No. 2:21-cv-00283
`
`District Judge Ted Stewart
`
`Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg
`
`
`v.
`
`NEARMAP US, INC.,
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`In this patent infringement case, Plaintiffs Eagle View Technologies, Inc. and Pictometry
`
`International Corp. (collectively, “Eagle View”) move for leave to rely on certain claims of U.S.
`
`Patent Nos. 8,542,880 (the ’880 patent) and 10,685,149 (the ’149 patent) in Eagle View’s final
`
`infringement contentions which were not specifically identified in the initial infringement
`
`contentions. (Mot., Doc. No. 100.) Eagle View asserts “recent discovery taken since serving
`
`final infringement contentions has informed Eagle View’s decisions as to which claims should
`
`be asserted.” (Id. at 5.) Eagle View represents Defendant Nearmap US, Inc. (“Nearmap”) does
`
`not oppose the motion. (Id. at 2–3.)
`
`As relevant here, Local Patent Rule 3.1 provides: “Final Infringement Contentions may
`
`rely on no more than 8 asserted claims, from the set of previously identified asserted claims, per
`
`asserted patent without an order of the court upon a showing of good cause and absence of unfair
`
`prejudice to opposing parties.” Given that the motion is unopposed, Eagle View has stated good
`
`cause to rely on previously unidentified claims, and there is no unfair prejudice to Nearmap.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-00283-TS-DAO Document 105 Filed 09/21/22 PageID.2038 Page 2 of 2
`
`Accordingly, the motion is granted. Eagle View may rely on the following previously
`
`unidentified claims in its final infringement contentions: claims 2, 6, 9, 15, and 18 of the ’880
`
`patent and claim 14 of the ’149 patent.
`
`DATED this 21st day of September, 2022.
`
`BY THE COURT:
`
`____________________________
`Daphne A. Oberg
`United States Magistrate Judge
`
`
`
`2
`
`
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
