Patent Case Watch

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

E.D. Tex.

Navico, Inc. et al v. Garmin International, Inc. et al, No. 2:16-cv-00190 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 29, 2017)

Adopted in Part Report and recommendation adopted with modification
Summary Judgment Invalidity (§ 102/§ 103)
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:16-cv-00190, Dkt. No. 208
Decided
August 29, 2017
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J.
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 176 Report and Recommendation
Length
2 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 the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 176) by Magistrate Judge Payne, whic h recommends that Navico’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment That the “Kongsberg” Documents and “MS1000 System” Do Not Qualify as Prior Art (Dkt. No. 102) be gr anted in part. Garmin objected to the Report, (Dkt. No. 194), and Navico responded, (Dkt. No. 206). Having considered the Report and Recomme ndation, Garmin’s objections, and Navico’s response, IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Payne’s Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No.

Download Opinion (PDF)

Source: govinfo.gov USCOURTS collection · retrieved July 23, 2026 · Report an error

Other documents in this case