§Why CasetextPricing

Sound View Innovations, LLC v. Hulu, LLC

MEMORANDUM in Opposition to NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Summary Judgment as to No Direct Infringement and Partial Summary Judgment of Limited Induced Infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,708,213, 6,757,796, and 9,462,074 and Memorandum in Support 253

12 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 235,819 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 215,979 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

  3. Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Techs., Inc.

    572 U.S. 915 (2014)   Cited 210 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because a "method patent ... is not infringed unless all the steps are carried out," a competitor did not induce direct infringement of a method patent merely by "carr[ying] out some steps constituting a method patent and encourag[ing] others to carry out the remaining steps"

  4. DSU Medical Corp. v. JMS Co.

    471 F.3d 1293 (Fed. Cir. 2006)   Cited 516 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the record supported jury verdict of no induced infringement where it showed defendant contacted an Australian attorney and "obtained letters from U.S. patent counsel advising that [its product] did not infringe"

  5. Ricoh Co. v. Quanta Computer Inc.

    550 F.3d 1325 (Fed. Cir. 2009)   Cited 205 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a party that sells or offers to sell software containing instructions to perform the patented method does not infringe the patent under § 271

  6. Akamai Techs., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc.

    797 F.3d 1020 (Fed. Cir. 2015)   Cited 154 times   31 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "liability under § 271 can also be found when an alleged infringer conditions participation in an activity or receipt of a benefit upon performance of a step or steps of a patented method and establishes the manner or timing of that performance"

  7. Travel Sentry, Inc. v. Tropp

    877 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2017)   Cited 27 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Travel Sentry, the Federal Circuit held that the district court “erred by defining the relevant activity in an unduly broad manner.

  8. Finjan, Inc. v. Sophos Inc.

    244 F. Supp. 3d 1016 (N.D. Cal. 2017)   Cited 10 times
    Finding that jury's finding of infringement of the '926 Patent was supported by substantial evidence

  9. Rearden LLC v. Walt Disney Co.

    293 F. Supp. 3d 963 (N.D. Cal. 2018)   Cited 4 times   2 Legal Analyses

    Case No. 17–cv–04006–JST Case No. 17–cv–04191–JST Case No. 17–cv–04192–JST 02-21-2018 REARDEN LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. The WALT DISNEY COMPANY, et al., Defendants. Rearden LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, et al., Defendants. Rearden LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Paramount Pictures Corporation, et al., Defendants. Rio Shaye Pierce, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, Berkeley, CA, Mark S. Carlson, Steve W. Berman, Pro Hac Vice, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, Seattle

  10. Voit Techs., LLC v. Drucker Labs, L.P.

    Civil Action No. 4:16-CV-00695 (E.D. Tex. May. 4, 2017)

    Civil Action No. 4:16-CV-00695 05-04-2017 VOIT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. DRUCKER LABS, L.P. Judge Mazzant Judge Mazzant MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending before the Court is Drucker Labs, L.P.'s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (Dkt. #15). After reviewing the relevant pleadings, the Court denies the motion. BACKGROUND On September 9, 2016, Voit Technologies, LLC ("Voit") filed its complaint against Drucker Labs, L.P. ("Drucker"), alleging direct patent infringement of U.S. Patent

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,160 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Section 271 - Infringement of patent

    35 U.S.C. § 271   Cited 6,030 times   1045 Legal Analyses
    Holding that testing is a "use"