In this patent infringement suit, Plaintiffs Acer, Inc., Acer America Corp., Gateway, Inc., and Plaintiffs HTC Corp. and HTC America, Inc. (collectively “Plaintiffs”) seek a declaratory Case5:08-cv-00882-PSG Document410 Filed12/04/12 Page1 of 3
Case No.: 08-0877
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
judgment that they do not infringe patents owned by Defendants Technology Properties Ltd., Patriot Scientific Corp., and Alliacense Ltd. (collectively “Defendants”).
1 Consistent with Pat. L.R. 4-3(c), the parties seek further construction of terms and phrases in claims in the patents-in-suit.2 Plaintiffs and Defendants each also seek reconsideration of Judge Ware’s earlier constructions of certain terms.3
As part of those motions for reconsideration, Plaintiffs seek to file a sur-reply on the grounds that Defendants’ reply to their motion for reconsideration introduced new arguments and new evidence.4 The court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ motion to file the sur-reply.
In light of this case’s long history and the trial date set for June 24, 2013, the court does not wish to add any further delay to the constructions by its preparation of a complete opinion setting forth its reasoning and analysis. To that end, the court at this time will simply issue its constructions without any significant reasoning and analysis:

Hope someone on board has some thoughts on this.

I wonder when DL will PR his thoughts on the results?? GL, ads