• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
Displaying 114-128 of 1,244 results

No. 275 MEMORANDUM OPINION providing claim construction for multiple terms in U.S. Patent Nos. 6,701,344, ...

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Activision Blizzard Inc., 1:16-cv-00453, No. 275 (D.Del. Aug. 29, 2017)
Instead, the court is free to attach the appropriate weight to appropriate sources 'in light of the statutes and policies that inform patent law."'
"In some cases, the ordinary meaning of claim language as understood by a person of skill in the art may be readily apparent even to lay judges, and claim construction in such cases involves little more than the application of the widely accepted meaning of commonly understood words."
Extrinsic evidence may assist the court in understanding the underlying technology, the meaning of terms to one skilled in the art, and how the invention works.
This citation provides that in one embodiment, seeking computers may reorder the first few port numbers created by a hashing algorithm.
For the reasons given above in connection with the previous term, I am changing "seeks" to "is configured" and striking "at all times" from Defendants' proposed construction.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 276 MEMORANDUM ORDER Denying (21 in 16-cv-453-RGA, 22 in 16-cv-454-RGA, 23 in 16-cv-455-RGA) MOTION ...

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Activision Blizzard Inc., 1:16-cv-00453, No. 276 (D.Del. Aug. 29, 2017)
The Broadcast Claims meet the need for "a reliable communications network that is suitable for the simultaneous sharing of information among a large number of the processes that are widely distributed."
A. Motion to Dismiss Rule 8 requires a complainant to provide "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief .... " Fed. R. Civ.
"A claim has facial plausibility when the [complainant] pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the [accused] is liable for the misconduct alleged."
It provides: "Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title."
I t I t Defendants' argument, belatedly raised in their reply brief, that the Broadcast Claims are not physical or tangible structures and thus are not patent-eligible subject matter, is waived.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 273

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Activision Blizzard Inc., 1:16-cv-00453, No. 273 (D.Del. Aug. 28, 2017)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 638 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Tanya Chaney of Shook, Hardy & Bacon, L.L.P. ...

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Activision Blizzard Inc., 1:16-cv-00453, No. 638 (D.Del. Feb. 1, 2019)
Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice
Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 and the attached certification, counsel moves the admission pro hac vice of Tanya Chaney of SHOOK, HARDY & BACON, L.L.P., 600 Travis Street, Suite 3400, Houston, TX 77002 to represent defendant Activision Blizzard, Inc. in this matter.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that counsel’s motion for admission pro hac vice of
Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5, I certify that I am eligible for admission to this Court, am admitted, practicing and in good standing as a member of the Bar of the State of Texas and pursuant to Local Rule 83.6 submit to the disciplinary jurisdiction of this Court for any alleged misconduct which occurs in the preparation or course of this action.
I also certify that I am generally familiar with this Court’s Local Rules.
In accordance with Standing Order for District Court Fund effective 9/1/16, I further certify that the annual fee of $25.00 has been paid to the Clerk of Court, or, if not paid previously, the fee payment will be submitted to the Clerk’s Office upon the filing of this motion.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 268 MEMORANDUM ORDER: The Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing (18 in 16-cv-453-RGA, 19 in 16-cv-454-RGA, ...

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Activision Blizzard Inc., 1:16-cv-00453, No. 268 (D.Del. Aug. 24, 2017)
Motion to Dismiss for Lack of StandingGranted
Section 2.1 grants Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. a "nonexclusive, nontransferable license under the [asserted patents] within the Field of Use .... " (D.I.
With these principles in mind, the key question in determining whether WiA V has 3 As a side note, Defendants assert they have actual licenses (Tr. 37:2-12), and have produced them.
I also think, by the way the language was drafted, that Boeing surrendered its right to enforce the patent with respect to Sony's potential licensees within the Field of Use.
This citation is not persuasive for this proposition because it does not mention, let alone discuss, WiA V. Alternatively, even if this was not enough to defeat standing, Defendants also have the ability to obtain a retroactive license from Sony.
The license agreement evinces the intent to give Sony the rights necessary to protect their "Third Party developers, publishers, Affiliates and end-users of Products" within the Field of Use.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 200 SPECIAL MASTER ORDER No. 7

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. et al, 1:16-cv-00455, No. 200 (D.Del. Jul. 21, 2017)
After receiving competing urgent emails from the parties as to their disputes concerning possible limitations for the Hynd deposition that they are prepared to take in Scotland and as to
RD 10439285v.1 the arrangements for the Plaintiff's six days of source code review, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
Plaintiff has six days [reasonable business hours] to review source code in total.
Plaintiff may use its time as it sees fit among the cases.
Mr. Hynd's deposition shall be limited to four hours but without restriction on the questions or topics.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 194

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. et al, 1:16-cv-00455, No. 194 (D.Del. Jul. 17, 2017)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 177 SPECIAL MASTER ORDER No. 5 as to Plaintiff's Request for Reconsideration

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. et al, 1:16-cv-00455, No. 177 (D.Del. Jul. 6, 2017)
Plaintiff’s two page brief supporting its request for reconsideration argues that the relevant portion of Special Master Order No. 4, denying Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery of updated versions, relied on a representation of Defendants’ counsel at the hearing on June 16, 2017.
Plaintiff contends that a June 22, 2017 deposition, taken after the Special Master Order No. 4 was issued, directly contradicts Defendants’ counsel.
That deposition testimony regarded the Frostbite engine and whether it changed the online multi-player functionality.
Their brief had extensive exhibits, including citations to other depositions regarding the use of the Frostbite engine, and satisfactorily supported the statements of Defendants’ counsel at the June 16, 2017 hearing.
Since further infringement contention interrogatory responses are due from Plaintiff later this month, it is not timely for the Special Master to specifically address that issue.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 171

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. et al, 1:16-cv-00455, No. 171 (D.Del. Jul. 5, 2017)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 483

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. et al, 1:16-cv-00455, No. 483 (D.Del. Aug. 16, 2019)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 232

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Activision Blizzard Inc., 1:16-cv-00453, No. 232 (D.Del. Jul. 21, 2017)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 227

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Activision Blizzard Inc., 1:16-cv-00453, No. 227 (D.Del. Jul. 17, 2017)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 158

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. et al, 1:16-cv-00455, No. 158 (D.Del. Jun. 23, 2017)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 150

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. et al, 1:16-cv-00455, No. 150 (D.Del. Jun. 20, 2017)

cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 481

Document Acceleration Bay LLC v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. et al, 1:16-cv-00455, No. 481 (D.Del. Jul. 30, 2019)

cite Cite Document
Analyze
<< 1 2 3 4 5 ... 8 9 10 11 12 ... >>