§Why CasetextPricing

E.Digital Corporation v. Casio America, Inc. et al

RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION to Compel Infringement Contentions in Compliance with PR 3-1 and to Limit eDigital to its Prior Theories

3 Cited authorities

  1. American Video Graphics v. Electronic Arts

    359 F. Supp. 2d 558 (E.D. Tex. 2005)   Cited 54 times
    Holding that plaintiff must supplement its initial charts with "specific references to the source code" once the defendant had provided plaintiff with the source code

  2. Connectel, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc.

    391 F. Supp. 2d 526 (E.D. Tex. 2005)   Cited 47 times
    Holding preliminary infringement contentions "providing vague, conclusory language or simply mimicking the language of the claims when identifying infringement fail to comply" with Eastern District of Texas' analogous local patent rales

  3. Orion IP, LLC v. Staples, Inc.

    407 F. Supp. 2d 815 (E.D. Tex. 2006)   Cited 20 times
    Holding that a defendant should "informally or by motion" seek clarification of any ambiguity in a patentee's PICs