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

E.D. Tex.

Plasmacam, Inc. v. Cncelectronics, LLC, et al al, No. 4:19-cv-00037 (E.D. Tex. June 22, 2020)

Granted in Part
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division
Case No.
No. 4:19-cv-00037, Dkt. No. 66
Decided
June 22, 2020
Judge
See opinion
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. It is therefore ORDERED that: (1) Defendants' Motion to Enforce Settlement (Dkt. 56) is hereby DENIED; and (2) Plaintiff's Motion to Enforce Settlement or, Alternatively, to Determine that No Settlement Was Rea…
Length
5 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.

Pending before the Court are competing motions to enforce settlement: (1) Defendants’ Motion to Enforce Settlement (Dkt. #56); and (2) Plaintiff’s Motion to Enforce Settlement or, Alternatively, to Determine that No Settlement Was Reached (Dkt. #57). After reviewing the motions and the relevant pleadings—and holding a status conference on June 5, 2020 regarding these motions—the Court finds that: (1) Defendants’ Motion to Enforce Settlement (Dkt.