Mosaic ImmunoEngineering is a nanotechnology-based immunotherapy company developing therapeutics and vaccines to positively impact the lives of patients and their families.

Free
Message: WE must have a settlement with Asusek on MMP...Thanks Sedley

WE must have a settlement with Asusek on MMP...Thanks Sedley

posted on Dec 21, 2008 11:44AM

The case dismissed was the Asusket case (Bold)

So, if all claims were settled as stated by lecky then they must have settled on the MMP as well as the Core Flash. No?


The three related
actions were Acer Inc., Acer America Corp., & Gateway, Inc. v. Technology Properties Ltd., et al., No. 5:08-cv-00877-JF (N.D. Cal.), Asustek Computer Inc. v. Technology Properties Ltd., et al., No. 5:08-cv-00884-JF (N.D. Cal.) and HTC Corp., et al. v. Technology Properties Ltd., et al., No. 5:08-cv-00882-JF (N.D. Cal.). The briefing and hearing of the Motion to Dismiss considered these three cases as a single unit. See Docket No. 49 at 2:12-16 & 3:2-3. On October 21, 2008, the Court denied TPL’s requests, finding that a dismissal or transfer was not warranted because the three cases at hand involve 9 of TPL’s patents while the prior action before Judge Ward only dealt with 3 of the 9 patents. Docket No. 49 at 6:2-3; 6:23-25. In particular, the HTC litigation involves 5 of TPL’s MMP patents and the Acer litigation involves 3 of those 5 patents.1 The Asustek litigation, however, includes all 5 MMP patents as well as 4 additional patents found in TPL’s CFP patents

See below

3rd Pacer--(Note in Bold) DECLARATION OF DAN LECKRONE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’

posted on Dec 19, 08 09:03PM

3rd Pacer--(Note in Bold) DECLARATION OF DAN LECKRONE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE COURT’S ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO TRANSFER VENUE


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
HTC CORPORATION and HTC
AMERICA, INC.,
Plaintiffs-Counterclaim
Defendants,
vs.
TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LIMITED, PATRIOT SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, and ALLIACENSE LIMITED,
Defendants-Counterclaim
Plaintiffs.
Case No. 08-cv-00882 JF
(related cases: 08-cv-00884, 00877)
DECLARATION OF DAN LECKRONE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE COURT’S ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO TRANSFER VENUE

I, Dan Leckrone, declare the following:
1. I am Chairman of Defendant Technology Properties Limited (“TPL”). I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth below and, if called upon to do so, could and would testify competently thereto. 2. On December 18, 2008, TPL reached a settlement with ASUSTeK Computer Inc. that disposes of all the claims in the related case Asustek Computer Inc. v. Technology Properties Limited, et al., No. 5:08-cv-00884-JF (N.D. Cal.). ASUSTeK and TPL will file a joint Notice of Dismissal with this Court shortly. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 19th day of December, 2008.
/s/ Dan Leckrone
Dan Leckrone
Chairman of Technology Properties Limited
SIGNATURE ATTESTATION
In accordance with General Order 45, part X(B), I hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from Dan Leckrone, Chairman of Technology
Properties Limited.
Dated: December 19, 2008 /s/ Ronald F. Lopez
Ronald F. Lopez

Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply