Robinson

Robinson v. ADVANCED DECOY RESEARCH, INC.

Good Law
519 F. Supp. 2d 1087·2007 WL 2775118·2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69673
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaSeptember 19, 200705CV1688 BTM (CAB)California9,816 words

Opinion

Opinion

Moskowitz, J.

ORDER RE: CLAIM CONSTRUCTION

Randall Robinson (“Plaintiff’ or “Paten-tee”) received U.S. Patent No. 4,930,448 (“the '448 patent”) on June 5, 1990, for his invention entitled “Animal Toy.” The device consists primarily of a motorized mechanism by which an object rotates about a stationary base via an elongate rod. The basic idea is that an animal will be drawn to the spinning object and have some sort of pleasant interaction with it.

On August 26, 2005, Mr. Robinson filed a complaint with this Court alleging infringement of the '448 patent by Advanced Decoy Research, Inc. On April 13, 2006, Plaintiff amended his complaint to include George Brint and Panic Mouse, Inc. as additional defendants.

Plaintiff and Defendants have filed briefs supporting their proposed constructions of the claims of Patent '448. Pursuant to Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370 , 116 S.Ct. 1384 , 134 L.Ed.2d 577 (1996), the Court must construe the claims of the '448 patent as a matter of law. On February 26, 2007, the court held a Markman hearing. Having considered the evidence presented in the parties’ briefs and arguments at the hearing, the Court issues the following order construing the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.