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

E.D. Tex.

Polaris Powerled Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al, No. 2:22-cv-00469 (E.D. Tex. July 9, 2024)

Granted
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:22-cv-00469, Dkt. No. 184
Decided
July 9, 2024
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (Motion(s)129 terminated)
Length
11 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 Opposed Motion for Leave to Amend Infringement Contentions (the “Motion”) filed by Plaintiff Polaris PowerLED Technologies, LLC (“Plaintiff”). (Dkt. No. 129). In the Motion, Plaintiff moves for leave to serve Second Supplemental Infringement Contentions for U.S. Patent No. 8,740,456 (the “’456 Paten t”). (Id. at 1).