ROVI CORPORATION v. ROKU, INC., 5:12-cv-02185-EJD. (2015)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20150810936
Visitors: 4
Filed: Aug. 07, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 07, 2015
Summary: PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE EDWARD J. DAVILA , District Judge . TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs Rovi Corporation, Rovi Guides, Inc. and United Video Properties, Inc. hereby voluntarily dismiss all remaining claims against Roku, Inc. in the above-referenced action without prejudice. This dismissal is prompted by the decision in Netflix, I
Summary: PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE EDWARD J. DAVILA , District Judge . TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs Rovi Corporation, Rovi Guides, Inc. and United Video Properties, Inc. hereby voluntarily dismiss all remaining claims against Roku, Inc. in the above-referenced action without prejudice. This dismissal is prompted by the decision in Netflix, In..
More
PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
EDWARD J. DAVILA, District Judge.
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs Rovi Corporation, Rovi Guides, Inc. and United Video Properties, Inc. hereby voluntarily dismiss all remaining claims against Roku, Inc. in the above-referenced action without prejudice.
This dismissal is prompted by the decision in Netflix, Inc. v. Rovi Corp. et al., Case No. 4:11-cv-06591-PJH on July 15, 2015 finding the claims of the `762 patent asserted against Netflix invalid under Section 101. Rovi disagrees with the decision in the Netflix case and expects to file an appeal shortly. In the meantime, Rovi has dismissed its claims against Roku without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
