Re: In regard to EDIG v. Apple only #170,737 &774 are dismissed. Patent 108 is alive
posted on
Dec 09, 2014 01:21PM
"As argued below, Apple’s “Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Pursuant to Rule 12(c)” is without merit. The Motion amounts to little more than a strategic attempt to force e.Digital to prematurely disclose its claim construction positions well before it has had a chance to conduct discovery or review Apple’s invalidity contentions."
If I remember, the 12C issue. …surrounded the contents of exhibit 1…a Samsung doc that was produced under seal. Supposed, factual matter introduced into the case after defendant had already made its formal pleadings. Like a bind side of some sort on e.Digital.
Some where in there, defendants were getting information from e.Digitals Samsung case and venturing into their cause....Wanting the judge to dismiss based on the information contained.
If Samsung gave up the info, I really hope the door is still open against Samsung….as I feel they produce the exhibit 1 material.
The 12C issues were shot down.
doni