SynQor, Inc. v. Artesyn Technologies, Inc. et al, No. 2:07-cv-00497 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 17, 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 P laintiff SynQor, Inc.‟s (“SynQor”) motion for judgment as a matter of law (“J MOL”) on the issues relating to the validity of the patents -in-suit1 (Dkt. No. 865). Because the Court has only entered a partial judgment on the ver dict, the Court considers the pending motion as a motion for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a). Having carefully considered the submissions, the record, and the applicable law, the Court finds that the motion should be GRANTED-in-part and DENIED -in-part.