Versata Software, Inc. et al v. SAP America, Inc. et al, No. 2:07-cv-00153 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 9, 2011)

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.

I. INTRODUCTION Pending before the Court is Defendants SAP America, Inc. ‟s and SAP AG ‟s (collectively, “SAP”) motion for judgment as a matter of law (“JMOL”) and new trial regarding liability issues (Dkt. No. 559). In general, Defendants argue that: (1) Versata failed to provide an element-by-element analysis under any of its direct infringement theories; (2) each of Versata‟s “use” theories was legally insufficient to demonstrate dir ect infringement by SAP; (3) Versata failed to prove infringement of dependant…