Filed: Nov. 26, 2014
Latest Update: Nov. 26, 2014
Summary: FINAL JUDGMENT MARIANA R. PFAELZER, District Judge. Plaintiff Enfish, LLC ("Enfish") filed this lawsuit against Defendants Microsoft Corporation; Fiserv, Inc.; Intuit, Inc.; Sage Software, Inc.; and Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. (collectively, "Defendants"), alleging that each Defendant had infringed U.S. Patent Nos. 6,151,604 and 6,163,775 (the "`604 and `775 patents). [Dkts. 1 & 30] Each Defendant answered, asserting defenses and declaratory judgment counterclaims that it has not infringed t
Summary: FINAL JUDGMENT MARIANA R. PFAELZER, District Judge. Plaintiff Enfish, LLC ("Enfish") filed this lawsuit against Defendants Microsoft Corporation; Fiserv, Inc.; Intuit, Inc.; Sage Software, Inc.; and Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. (collectively, "Defendants"), alleging that each Defendant had infringed U.S. Patent Nos. 6,151,604 and 6,163,775 (the "`604 and `775 patents). [Dkts. 1 & 30] Each Defendant answered, asserting defenses and declaratory judgment counterclaims that it has not infringed th..
More
FINAL JUDGMENT
MARIANA R. PFAELZER, District Judge.
Plaintiff Enfish, LLC ("Enfish") filed this lawsuit against Defendants Microsoft Corporation; Fiserv, Inc.; Intuit, Inc.; Sage Software, Inc.; and Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. (collectively, "Defendants"), alleging that each Defendant had infringed U.S. Patent Nos. 6,151,604 and 6,163,775 (the "`604 and `775 patents). [Dkts. 1 & 30] Each Defendant answered, asserting defenses and declaratory judgment counterclaims that it has not infringed the `604 or `775 patents and that both patents are invalid. [Dkts. 33, 35, 37, 39 & 41]
By orders entered on March 31, November 11 and November 21, 2014 (Dkts. 241, 242, 303 and 306), this Court granted summary judgment in Defendants' favor on all asserted claims in the `604 and `775 patents as follows: (i) claims 31, 32, 46 and 47 of the `604 patent and claims 31, 32 and 47 of the `775 patent are invalid for anticipation by the prior art; (ii) claims 1, 2 and 16 of the `604 patent are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f); (iii) claims 1, 2, 16, 17, 31, 32, 46 and 47 of the `604 patent and claims 31, 32 and 47 of the `775 patent are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101; and (iv) Defendants have not infringed claim 17 of the `604 patent.
Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS, ADJUDGES AND DECREES THAT:
1. Pursuant to the Court's Order, final judgment against Enfish shall be entered in favor of each Defendant as a prevailing party;
2. Enfish's Complaint, as amended, and all of its asserted causes of action are dismissed with prejudice and Enfish shall recover nothing in this action;
3. Defendants' respective counterclaims for a declaration that the asserted claims of the `604 and `775 patents are invalid are granted;
4. Defendants' respective counterclaims for a declaration that each Defendant has not infringed the'604 patent are granted as to claim 17;
5. Except as expressly granted above, Defendants' respective counterclaims and defenses are dismissed without prejudice as moot.
6. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1) and Local Rules 54-2 and 54-3, Defendants are entitled to recover their costs incurred in this action; and
7. Any request by Defendants for an award of attorneys' fees and related nontaxable expenses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(2) shall be made pursuant to Local Rule 54-10.
Because no claims are remaining in this action, the Court expressly directs the Clerk to enter this Final Judgment as set forth above pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.
