Auto-Dril, Inc. v. National Oilwell Varco, LP., H-16-280 (2018)
Court: District Court, S.D. Texas
Number: infdco20180423b32
Visitors: 4
Filed: Apr. 20, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 20, 2018
Summary: FINAL JUDGMENT LEE H. ROSENTHAL , Chief District Judge . The parties jointly stipulate for entry of final judgment of patent invalidity. (Docket Entry No. 200). Final judgment of invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 6,994,172 is entered for the defendants and against Auto-Dril for the following: (a) National Oilwell's and Canrig's counterclaims for a declaratory judgment of patent invalidity for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(2); and (b) National Oilwell's and Canrig's third affirmative defe
Summary: FINAL JUDGMENT LEE H. ROSENTHAL , Chief District Judge . The parties jointly stipulate for entry of final judgment of patent invalidity. (Docket Entry No. 200). Final judgment of invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 6,994,172 is entered for the defendants and against Auto-Dril for the following: (a) National Oilwell's and Canrig's counterclaims for a declaratory judgment of patent invalidity for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(2); and (b) National Oilwell's and Canrig's third affirmative defen..
More
FINAL JUDGMENT
LEE H. ROSENTHAL, Chief District Judge.
The parties jointly stipulate for entry of final judgment of patent invalidity. (Docket Entry No. 200). Final judgment of invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 6,994,172 is entered for the defendants and against Auto-Dril for the following: (a) National Oilwell's and Canrig's counterclaims for a declaratory judgment of patent invalidity for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112(2); and (b) National Oilwell's and Canrig's third affirmative defense under 35 U.S.C. § 112(2).
All other claims, counterclaims, defenses, or other matters which have been asserted (except for any claim or motion relating to an "exceptional case" determination pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285 or other bases for the award of attorneys' fees or costs, the timing of which is governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1)-(2) and 58(e)) are dismissed without prejudice.
Source: Leagle
