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

E.D. Tex.

Invensys Systems, Inc. v. Emerson Electric Co. et al, No. 6:12-cv-00799 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 6, 2014)

Granted in Part
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division
Case No.
No. 6:12-cv-00799, Dkt. No. 205
Decided
August 6, 2014
Judge
Leonard Davis, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION and ORDER GRANTING N PART AND DENYING IN PART Ivensys's motion for summary judgment
Length
21 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. 5,555,190 (“the ’190 Patent”) and 6,505,131 (“the ’131 Patent”), asserted in this suit by Micro Motion Inc., USA (“Micro Motion”). Also before the Court is Invensys’s Motion for Summary Judgment of Indefiniteness (Docket No. 143). On May 1 , 2014, the parties prese nted arguments on the disputed claim terms at a Markman hearing and also presented oral arguments on the motion for summary judgment .