Semcon IP Inc. v. Huawei Device USA Inc. et al, No. 2:16-cv-00437 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 4, 2018)

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 Magistrate Judge Payne ’s recommendation to deny Semcon’s motion for summary judgment that the ’627 patent is not invalid in view of the Hitachi SH -4 reference. Dkt. No. 567. For dispositive matters referred to a magistrate judge , the district court must “determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). “The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommend disposition.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C.