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

E.D. Tex.

Microunity Systems Engineering Inc v. Acer Inc et al, No. 2:10-cv-00091 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 30, 2011)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:10-cv-00091, Dkt. No. 324
Decided
September 30, 2011
Judge
See opinion
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Defendant Qualcomms Motion to Sever and Stay Certain Claims. The Court also DENIES Qualcomms Motion to Transfer Venue to the Northern District of California because …
Length
17 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 Defendant Qualcomm Inc.‟s (“Qualcomm”) Motion to Sever and Stay Certain Claims and Motion to Transfer Venue. (Dkt. Nos. 178, 179 in Case Number 2:10-cv-91; Dkt. Nos. 143, 144 in Case Number 2:10-cv-185.) Other defendants in this case include Apple, Inc. (“Apple”); AT&T Inc. and AT&T Mobility LLC (collectively, “AT&T”); Cellco Partnership (“Cellco”); Google Inc. (“Google”); Exedea, Inc., HTC Corp., and HTC America Inc. (collectively, “HTC”); LG Electronics, Inc. and LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., Inc.