Mshift, Inc. v. Digital Insight Corp.

Good Law
747 F. Supp. 2d 1147·2010 WL 4025916
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 8, 2010C 10-00710 WHACalifornia14,859 words

Opinion

Opinion

Alsup, J.

CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ORDER, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS

INTRODUCTION

In this patent-infringement dispute involving mobile-banking technology, defen dants Digital Insight Corporation, Mobile Money Ventures, LLC (“MMV”), and thirteen of their bank and credit-union customers move for summary judgment on plaintiff MShift, Inc.’s claim that their accused mobile-banking system infringes United States Patent No. 6,950,881. Also addressed herein — following a claim construction hearing and full briefing on the merits — are the constructions of two claim terms relevant to the resolution of the instant motion. Finally, plaintiffs recently filed motion for Rule 37 discovery sanctions is addressed by this order.

This action arose out of a business relationship gone sour. Not long ago, MShift and Digital Insight were business partners providing mobile-banking products and services to financial institutions across the country. MShift’s mobile-banking technology formed the backbone of those services. The relationship, however, failed to last. After their partnership folded, both companies went their separate ways and…

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.