Six up, six down.
Reading Markman rulings sometimes reminds me of the Curies going through mountains of pitchblende to find a little radium. In this case, the valuable part for most readers is the Court’s decision finding two claims indefinite.
This was a motion to dismiss for unenforceability and lack of standing, so if the effect of assignments are your thing, this is your lucky day.
Today’s Law360 article by Matthew Bultman on Judge Gilstrap’s new standing order requiring subject matter eligibility contentions is a good read. I wanted to highlight a few of the comments.
Some time back I posted about this very interesting gym locker dispute. Following
Not too long ago I posted on Judge Albright’s denial of a motion to substitute experts. He just ruled on the request to reconsider that decision. I would say, as I did recently on the SJ motion in this case, that that would give us insight into how he views motions to reconsider, but the graphic sort of gives it away.
I ran this by a court reporter who works in the EDTX and
The attached order from Judge Barker in Tyler provides some guidance on how not to extend dates under the specific provisions of a scheduling order in the Tyler Division.
Just in case anyone might find this useful.
Per last week’s email, on behalf of Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap, E.D. Tex., EDTX Bar President Charles Bundren and the entire Eastern District of Texas Bar Association, Clyde Siebman, chair of the EDTX
The conference will be held September 23-25, 2019 in Plano, Texas.
Please access the conference schedule and registration details through the links below or the links on the Court’s website at www.txed.uscourts.gov