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

E.D. Tex.

InterForm Incorporated v. Staples Inc, No. 2:13-cv-00281 (E.D. Tex. July 29, 2015)

Granted in Part
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:13-cv-00281, Dkt. No. 88
Decided
July 29, 2015
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J.
Document
Memorandum Order
Length
7 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 is Defendants’ Motion for Exceptional Case Determination and Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (Dkt. No. 79) (“Mo t.”) filed by Defendants Target Corporation, Staples Inc., and MEGA Brands America, Inc. (co llectively, “Defendants”). Plaintiff InterForm Incorporated (“InterForm”) opposes the motion. Also before the Court is Interform’s Opposition to Defendant MEGA Brands’ Proposed Bill of Costs (Dkt. No. 82). MEGA Brands filed a response to Interform’s Opposition and a Cross- Motion for Extension of Time to File its Proposed Bill of Costs (Dkt.