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. Sept. 21, 2022)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division
Case No.
No. 4:19-cv-00037, Dkt. No. 103
Decided
September 21, 2022
Judge
See opinion
Document
Memorandum Order
Docket Entry
Amos L. Mazzant, III on 9/21/2022. (baf, )MEMORANDUM ORDER AND OPINION. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Entry of Final Judgment (Dkt. 100) is hereby DENIED. The Court will enter an amended final judgment in accordance wi…
Length
8 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 CNC Electronics, LLC, Fourhills Designs, LLC, Thomas Lee Caudle, and Martha Jane Caudle’ s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment ( Dkt. #100). On remand of the above -captioned matter from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Dkt. #97), the parties filed competing briefs for entry of final judgment (Dkt. #99; Dkt. #100). Having reviewed the briefs, the mandate, and the appl icable law, the Court finds that Defendants’ Motion for Entry of Final Judgment (Dkt. #100) should be DENIED.