I posted recently about a motion to stay pre-institution. This order shows what can happen after institution.
Judge Gilstrap recently addressed this issue.
Judge Godbey literally checked the boxes in this order.
This order builds on a construction of the same patent in a prior case.
Ever prepared a geological map and had it plagiarized? William Smith did. And the plaintiff here claimed the same thing.
This last of the three posts on Judge Albright’s new procedures covers the changes in OGP 3.1, which deal primarily with claim construction.
The question was whether the defendant had to produce a corporate rep on certain topics. These issues come up frequently, so the opinion is helpful.
It’s unclear whether the discovery might be part of a trade for some biscuits and gravy from Magnolia Table.
A common question lately is what is and isn’t enough to get an in-person hearing moved to video. We have another data point that indicates the end of video hearings in most cases may be drawing near.
Marshall now has two patent jury trials under its belt post-COVID. Did I mention we’re getting a new Starbucks?