Case 1:13-cv-00920-LPS Document 175 Filed 10/28/19 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 6197
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELA WARE
`
`ARENDI S.A.R.L.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`LG ELECTRONICS INC., et al.
`
`Defendants.
`
`AREND! S.A.R.L.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`APPLE INC.
`
`Defendant.
`
`ARENDI S.A.R.L.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`MICROSOFT MOBILE INC.
`
`Defendant.
`
`AREND! S.A.R.L.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`MOTOROLA MOBILITY, LLC
`
`Defendant.
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`C.A. No. 12-1595-LPS
`
`C.A. No. 12-1596-LPS
`
`C.A. No. 12-1599-LPS
`
`C.A. No. 12-1601-LPS
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELA WARE
`
`ARENDI S.A.R.L.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`LG ELECTRONICS INC., et al.
`
`Defendants.
`
`AREND! S.A.R.L.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`APPLE INC.
`
`Defendant.
`
`ARENDI S.A.R.L.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`MICROSOFT MOBILE INC.
`
`Defendant.
`
`AREND! S.A.R.L.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`MOTOROLA MOBILITY, LLC
`
`Defendant.
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`C.A. No. 12-1595-LPS
`
`C.A. No. 12-1596-LPS
`
`C.A. No. 12-1599-LPS
`
`C.A. No. 12-1601-LPS
`
`
`
`Case 1:13-cv-00920-LPS Document 175 Filed 10/28/19 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 6198
`
`AREND! S.A.R.L.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`SONY MOBILE
`COMMUNICATIONS (USA) INC.
`
`Defendant.
`
`ARENDI S.A.R.L.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`GOOGLE, LLC
`
`Defendant.
`
`ARENDI S.A.R.L.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`OATH HOLDINGS INC., et al.
`
`Defendants.
`
`SMART LOCKING TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`IGLOOHOME INC.
`
`Defendants.
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`C.A. No. 12-1602-LPS
`
`C.A. No. 13-919-LPS
`
`C.A. No. 13-920-LPS
`
`C.A. No. 19-992-LPS
`
`
`
`Case 1:13-cv-00920-LPS Document 175 Filed 10/28/19 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 6199
`
`SMART LOCKING TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`V.
`
`LOCKS TA TE, INC.
`
`Defendants.
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`ORDER
`
`C.A. No. 19-993-LPS
`
`WHEREAS, the Court has received motions challenging whether one or more patents
`
`asserted in the above-captioned actions seek to claim subject matter that is not eligible for
`
`patentability (see 35 U.S.C. § 101 ) (hereinafter, " 101 Motions");
`
`WHEREAS, the Court believes certain efficiencies in resolving 101 Motions are
`
`attainable by hearing argument on multiple such motions at essentially the same time;
`
`WHEREAS, the Court seeks to use its limited resources in a manner that may promote
`
`"the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding" (Fed. R. Civ. P.
`
`1 );
`
`NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
`
`1.
`
`The Court will hear argument on the following 101 Motions at a combined
`
`hearing on Friday, December 20, 2019 from 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.:
`
`1.
`
`Arendi S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, et al. , 12-1595-LPS D.I. 115 (Motion
`
`for Judgment on the Pleadings)
`
`11.
`
`Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc., 12-1596-LPS D.I. 122 (Motion for
`
`Judgment on the Pleadings)
`
`
`
`Case 1:13-cv-00920-LPS Document 175 Filed 10/28/19 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 6200
`
`111.
`
`Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Microsoft Mobile Inc., 12-1599-LPS D.I. 123 (Motion
`
`for Judgment on the Pleadings)
`
`IV.
`
`Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Motorola Mobility LLC, 12-1601-LPS D.I. 123 (Motion
`
`for Judgment on the Pleadings)
`
`v.
`
`Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc., 12-1602-LPS
`
`D.I. 115 (Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings)
`
`v1.
`
`Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Google LLC, 13-919-LPS D.I. 122 (Motion for
`
`Judgment on the Pleadings)
`
`VIL
`
`Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Oath Holdings Inc., et al., 13-920-LPS D.I. 126
`
`(Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings)
`
`v111.
`
`Smart Locking Technologies, LLC v. Igloohome Inc., 19-992-LPS D.I. 9
`
`(Motion to Dismiss), D.I. 16 (Renewed Motion to Dismiss)
`
`IX.
`
`Smart Locking Technologies, LLC v. LockState, Inc., 19-993-LPS D.I. 8
`
`(Motion to Dismiss), D.I. 15 (Renewed Motion to Dismiss).
`
`2.
`
`The hearing will be held in Courtroom 6B. Chief Judge Stark will preside. Each
`
`party in each of the above-captioned actions must be represented by at least one attorney for the
`
`entire duration of the hearing (noted in 12 above). The Court may call for argument on any of
`
`the 101 Motions at any time during the hearing.
`
`
`
`Case 1:13-cv-00920-LPS Document 175 Filed 10/28/19 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 6201
`
`3.
`
`No later than December 13, 2019, each party in each of the above-captioned
`
`actions shall file a letter brief, not to exceed three (3) pages, responding to the questions in the
`
`attached Section 101 Motions Pre-Hearing Checklist.
`
`October 28, 2019
`Wilmington, Delaware
`
`HONORABLE LEONARD P. ST ARK
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`
`
`Case 1:13-cv-00920-LPS Document 175 Filed 10/28/19 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 6202
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELA WARE
`
`Section 101 Motions Pre-Hearing Checklist
`
`The Court will be hearing oral argument on a motion to dismiss and/or motion for judgment on
`the pleadings which seeks a ruling that one or more claims of the patent(s)-in-suit is not eligible
`for patenting due to its subject matter. To assist the Court in preparing for the hearing, each
`party shall file a letter brief, not to exceed three (3) pages, responding to the following:
`
`1.
`
`(a) What claim(s) is/are representative?
`
`(b) For which claim(s) must the Court determine eligibility?
`
`2.
`
`(a) Is claim construction necessary before patentability can be decided?
`
`(b) If so, which term(s) must be construed?
`
`(c) What are your proposed constructions for the term(s) you contend must be construed?
`
`If you are contending that factual dispute(s) should cause the Court to deny the motion,
`identify with specificity such factual dispute(s).
`
`(a) Are there materials other than the complaint/answer and the intrinsic patent record
`(i.e., the patent and prosecution history) that you contend the Court should consider in
`evaluating the motion?
`
`(b) If so, identify those materials and the basis on which the Court may properly consider
`them at this stage.
`
`What Supreme Court or Federal Circuit case is this case most like? That is, if the Court
`is to analogize the claims at issue in the motion to claims that have previously been found
`to be patent (in)eligible by a higher court, which case provides the best analogy?
`
`Why should/shouldn't the Court deny the motion without prejudice to renew at a later
`stage of this litigation?
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`
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
