Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

E.D. Tex.

Mass Engineered Design, Inc. et al v. Ergotron, Inc. et al, No. 2:06-cv-00272 (E.D. Tex. May 30, 2008)

Granted
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:06-cv-00272, Dkt. No. 344
Decided
May 30, 2008
Judge
Leonard Davis, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER granting Pltf's motion for clarification
Length
4 pages

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

Before the Court are Pl aintiffs MASS Engineered Design, Inc. and Jerry Moscovitch’s (collectively “MASS”) Mot ion to Clarify Claim Cons truction Opinion (Docket No. 282). Afte r careful consideration of the parties’ written submissions, the Court GRANTS MASS’s motion for clarification. BACKGROUND On March 13, 2008, the Court issued its claim construction opinio n construing disputed terms in the ‘978 and ‘170 patents.