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

E.D. Tex.

TracBeam, L.L.C. v. AT&T Inc. et al, No. 6:11-cv-00096 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 23, 2013)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division
Case No.
No. 6:11-cv-00096, Dkt. No. 352
Decided
January 23, 2013
Judge
Leonard Davis, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION, ORDER DENYING 316 MOTION for Summary Judgment Partial Summary Judgment of Invalidity Based on Indefiniteness filed by Location Lab, Inc, AT&T Mobility L.L.C., AT&T Inc., Telecommunication Systems, Inc., Cellco Partne…
Length
39 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.

This Memorandum Opinion construes the disputed claim terms in U.S. Patent Nos. 7,525,484 (“the ‘ 484 Patent”) and 7, 764,231 (“the ‘2 31 Patent”). Additionally, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment of Indefiniteness (Docket No. 316) is DENIED. BACKGROUND The Plaintiff TracBeam, L.L.C. (“TracBeam”) sued the following defendants for infringement of the ‘231 and ‘484 Patent s: AT&T, Inc. and AT&T Mobility, L.L.C. (“AT&T”); MetroPCS Communications, Inc. and MetroPCS Wireless, Inc.