• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
347 results

Gesture Technology Partners, LLC v. Huawei Device Co., Ltd. et al

Docket 2:21-cv-00040, Texas Eastern District Court (Feb. 4, 2021)
District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, presiding, Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne
Patent
DivisionMarshall
FlagsCASREF, CLOSED, JRG1, JURY, LEAD, PATENT/TRADEMARK, PROTECTIVE-ORDER
Cause35:271 Patent Infringement
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Patent
7933431; 8194924; 8553079; 8878949
7933431
819492485530798878949
Mediator David Folsom
Plaintiff Gesture Technology Partners, LLC
Defendant Huawei Device Co., Ltd.
...
cite Cite Docket

No. 242 ORDER granting 241 Motion to Dismiss With Prejudice

Document Gesture Technology Partners, LLC v. Huawei Device Co., Ltd. et al, 2:21-cv-00040, No. 242 (E.D.Tex. Mar. 24, 2022)
Motion to Dismiss (Demurrer)Granted
Before the Court is the Joint Motion for Dismissal with Prejudice filed by Plaintiff Gesture Technology Partners, LLC (“GTP”) and Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (Dkt. No.
Having considered the Motion, and in light of its joint nature, the Court is of the opinion that it should be and hereby is GRANTED.
Accordingly, GTP’s claims for relief against Samsung and relating to Samsung’s accused products in this case are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
It is ORDERED that each party is to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.
The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the above-captioned cases.
cite Cite Document

No. 240 ORDER granting 239 Motion to Extend the Stay of All Deadlines

Document Gesture Technology Partners, LLC v. Huawei Device Co., Ltd. et al, 2:21-cv-00040, No. 240 (E.D.Tex. Mar. 16, 2022)
Motion to StayGranted
Before the Court is the Joint Motion to Extend the Stay of All Deadlines, filed by Plaintiff Gesture Technology Partners, LLC and Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. Dkt. No. 239.
After consideration, the Court GRANTS the Motion.
It is therefore ORDERED that all deadlines are STAYED through March 18, 2022.
It is further ORDERED that, absent a showing of good cause, the Parties will submit dismissal papers no later than March 18, 2022.
cite Cite Document

No. 236 ORDER granting 235 Motion to Stay All Deadlines and Notice of Settlement

Document Gesture Technology Partners, LLC v. Huawei Device Co., Ltd. et al, 2:21-cv-00040, No. 236 (E.D.Tex. Feb. 11, 2022)
Motion to StayGranted
Before the Court is the Joint Motion to Stay All Deadlines and Notice of Settlement, filed by Plaintiff Gesture Technology Partners, LLC and Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. Dkt. No. 235.
After consideration, the Court GRANTS the Motion.
It is therefore ORDERED that all deadlines are STAYED through March 11, 2022.
It is further ORDERED that, absent a showing of good cause, the Parties will submit dismissal papers no later than March 11, 2022.
SIGNED this 11th day of February, 2022.
cite Cite Document

No. 234 ORDER granting 233 Motion to Amend/Correct

Document Gesture Technology Partners, LLC v. Huawei Device Co., Ltd. et al, 2:21-cv-00040, No. 234 (E.D.Tex. Feb. 7, 2022)
Before the Court is the Joint Motion Regarding Upcoming Deadlines filed by Plaintiff Gesture Technology Partners, LLC and Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc.. Having considered the Joint Motion, the Court ORDERS the following amendment to this Court’s Order, Dkt. No. 229: Original Deadline Amended Deadline Event February 7, 2022 February 10, 2022 February 11, 2022 February 16, 2022 Samsung to serve a supplemental rebuttal expert report no later than this date.
GTP to file a single responsive supplemental brief of no more than seven (7) pages no later than this date.
In addition, the Court ORDERS the following amendment to the Sixth Amended Docket Control Order, Dkt. No. 155: Original Deadline Amended Deadline Event February 7, 2022 February 10, 2022 * If a juror questionnaire is to be used, an editable (in Microsoft Word) questionnaire shall be jointly submitted to the Deputy Clerk in Charge by this date.
cite Cite Document

No. 232 ORDER RE: 223 Joint Notice of Proposed Agreed Order on Pending Motions. denying in part 136 ...

Document Gesture Technology Partners, LLC v. Huawei Device Co., Ltd. et al, 2:21-cv-00040, No. 232 (E.D.Tex. Feb. 3, 2022)
Samsung Defendants’ Motion to Preclude the Opinions and Testimony of Plaintiff’s Technical Expert Benedict Occhiogrosso (Dkt. 137) DENIED-IN-PART as Moot by agreement between the parties.
Motion to preclude opinions and testimony based on impermissible claim construction of the term “light source” in the ’079 Patent (Dkt. 138 at Section
Motion to preclude opinions and testimony for failure to identify applicable subsection of 35 U.S.C. § 102 (Dkt. 138 at Section II.B); Motion to preclude opinions and testimony regarding asserted method claims for failure to apply the correct standard (Dkt. 138 at Section II.C); and Motion to preclude opinions and testimony regarding anticipation for which Dr. Stevenson did not opine that each and every element is found within a single prior art reference (Dkt. 138 at Section II.E).
Summary judgment that the Asserted Claims of the ’079 Patent are not infringed by the Accused Features other than Air Gestures (Dkt. 140 at Section V.B).
The agreement between the parties does not render moot Section V.E as it pertains to summary judgment of no damages in the event the Court grants either or both of Samsung’s Daubert motions as to Mr. Kennedy and Dr. Groehn.
cite Cite Document

No. 229 ORDER granting 219 Joint Stipulation Regarding Outstanding Motions

Document Gesture Technology Partners, LLC v. Huawei Device Co., Ltd. et al, 2:21-cv-00040, No. 229 (E.D.Tex. Feb. 1, 2022)
Before the Court is the Joint Stipulation Regarding Outstanding Motions (“Stipulation”), filed by Plaintiff Gesture Technology Partners, LLC (“GTP”) and Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, “Samsung”) (altogether, “Parties”).
1 The Contested Applications are: Tracking Autofocus, Selfie Focus, Smart OIS, Smart Pause, Smart Scroll, Blur Background, Internet Transfer After Sense (e.g., QR Code), Bixby Vision, Control Exposure Based on Location, Live Masks Track/Apply, Live Stickers Track, Beauty Mode, and Portrait Mode.
To allow Samsung to address and respond to the supplemental opinions set forth in the supplemental expert reports, the Parties request that the Court: (a) permit Samsung to file a single supplemental brief of no more than seven (7) pages as to its dispositive motions and motions to strike expert testimony (including Daubert motions) that are impacted by GTP’s supplemental expert reports no later than January 28, 2022; (b) permit Samsung to serve a supplemental rebuttal expert report no later than February 7, 2022; and (c) permit GTP to file a single responsive supplemental brief of no more than seven (7) pages no later than February 11, 2022.
GTP represents that it produced its documents from the negotiation of the Huawei License to Samsung on January 24, 2022.
It is therefore ORDERED that the posture of the pending motions are affected as outlined herein.
cite Cite Document

No. 230 ORDER re 222 Joint Stipulation Regarding Asserted Patents and Prior ArtReferences

Document Gesture Technology Partners, LLC v. Huawei Device Co., Ltd. et al, 2:21-cv-00040, No. 230 (E.D.Tex. Feb. 1, 2022)
Before the Court is the Joint Stipulation Regarding Asserted Patents and Prior Art References, filed by Plaintiff Gesture Technology Partners, LLC (“GTP”) and Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, “Samsung”).
GTP hereby withdraws and moves to dismiss with prejudice its allegations that Samsung infringes U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079.
GTP hereby withdraws and moves to dismiss with prejudice its allegations that Samsung infringes claims 1, 2, 3, 6, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 30 of U.S. Patent No. 7,933,431.
This limitation does not preclude Samsung and its experts from relying on these and additional references as background art or for demonstrating the state of the art at the time of invention (including those that relate to Samsung’s § 101 defense), consistent with the disclosures set forth in Samsung’s expert report on invalidity.
It is therefore ORDERED that GTP’s claims of patent infringement are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as outlined herein.
cite Cite Document
1 2 3 4 5 ... >>