Some guidance on raising indefiniteness in a summary judgment motion in River City.
Judge Payne found a couple of terms indefinite in this Markman order.
Good name for a Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy character, don’t you think?
Sounds like someone’s frustrated, doesn’t it?
Kind of a two-fer here as far as bases for motions to dismiss. Well, really a three-fer if you want to get technical.
I give up – I’ll just start calling them this to keep my dictation software happy. I don’t post on Markman rulings unless they include dispositive rulings or notable discussion, but both were present here.
No, I can’t figure out what they mean. And neither could the Court.
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.
Waco’s newest “must-see” location is actually not the federal courthouse, nor even the latest Magnolia venue, but instead the new memorial on the riverfront to Waco native Doris Miller, who was awarded the Navy Cross by fellow Central Texan Admiral Chester Nimitz (who was a Fredericksburg boy, you know) for his heroism at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. We visited the memorial, with its statue of Miller and backdrop evoking the iconic cage masts of his battleship West Virginia Sunday afternoon on our way home from camping and Top Gun. Meanwhile, a few blocks away, across the rain-swollen Brazos, Judge Albright continues to crank out opinions, including this one rejecting an indefiniteness argument.
I challenge you to find a happier 16 year old than this one, who spent the first day of his summer vacation getting some stick time in a World War II trainer, as reported by the local paper. He was, in fact, smiling as broadly as I expect the defendants were when they got Judge Kernodle’s 122 page claim construction order in this 11 patent case raising over 30 terms, which addressed their indefiniteness arguments. They did pretty well.