ReedHycalog UK, Ltd. et al v. United Diamond Drilling Services, Inc et al, No. 6:07-cv-00251 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 15, 2009)

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.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION REEDHYCALOG UK, LTD, et al. Plaintiff vs. UNITED DIAMOND DRILLING SERVICES, INC., et al. Defendant § § § § § CASE NO. 6:07 CV 251 § PATENT CASE § § § § MEMORANDUM OPINION This Memorandum Opinion construe s the terms in the Patents-in-Suit: U.S. P at. No. 6,585,064 (the “’064 Patent); U.S. Pat. No. 6,592,985 (the “’985 Patent”); U.S. Pat. No. 6,749,033 (the “’033 Patent”); U.S. Pat. No. 6,589,640 (the “’640 Patent”); U.S. Pat. No. 6,739,214 (the “’214 Patent”); U.S. Pat.