Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP v. VICTAULIC COMPANY, 10-4645. (2012)

Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania Number: infdco20120117607 Visitors: 19
Filed: Jan. 06, 2012
Latest Update: Jan. 06, 2012
Summary: ORDER EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, District Judge. AND NOW , this 5th day of January, 2012 , it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to dismiss (doc. no. 63) is GRANTED as to Defendant's counterclaim of invalidity and non-infringement of U.S. Patent Number 7,819,201, it is DENIED as to Defendant's counterclaim of invalidity and non-infringement of U.S. Patent Number 7,793,736; It is hereby further ORDERED , that Plaintiff's motion to strike Defendant's affirmative defenses (doc. no. 63
More

ORDER

EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, District Judge.

AND NOW, this 5th day of January, 2012, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to dismiss (doc. no. 63) is GRANTED as to Defendant's counterclaim of invalidity and non-infringement of U.S. Patent Number 7,819,201, it is DENIED as to Defendant's counterclaim of invalidity and non-infringement of U.S. Patent Number 7,793,736;

It is hereby further ORDERED, that Plaintiff's motion to strike Defendant's affirmative defenses (doc. no. 63) is GRANTED as to Defendant's affirmative defenses of invalidity and non-infringement of U.S. Patent Number 7,819,201, it is DENIED as to Defendant's affirmative defenses of invalidity and non-infringement of U.S. Patent Number 7,793,736;

It is hereby further ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a reply memorandum of law (doc. no. 72) and Defendant's motion for leave to file a surreply memorandum of law (doc. no. 75) are GRANTED;1

It is hereby further ORDERED that Defendant shall file an amended answer to Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint by January 12, 2012;

It is hereby further ORDERED that, in light of the Court's ruling on Plaintiff's motion to dismiss, the parties' shall meet and confer and submit to the Court the remaining claims in need of construction by January 18, 2012.

It is hereby further ORDERED, that a Markman hearing is scheduled to consider the parties' proposed claim constructions on Thursday, February 9, 2012, at 9:00 A.M. in Courtroom 11A, United States District Court, 601 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. The Court considered the substance of both memoranda in its ruling on Plaintiff's motion to dismiss
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer