Keithley

Keithley v. the Homestore. Com, Inc.

Good Law
553 F. Supp. 2d 1148·2008 WL 2037745·2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57284
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 12, 2008C 03-4447 SICalifornia1,594 words

Opinion

Opinion

Illston, J.

ORDER RE: CROSS MOTIONS TO STRIKE

Currently pending before the Court are plaintiffs’ motion to strike defendants’ Final Invalidity Contentions (“invalidity contentions”) and defendants’ counter motion to strike plaintiffs’ Amended Final Infringement Contentions (“infringement contentions”). For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES both motions.

DISCUSSION

Plaintiffs Kevin Keithley and Tren Technologies Holdings (“Tren”) filed their complaint on October 1, 2003 against defendants Homestore.com and others, alleging that defendants infringed 58 claims of plaintiffs’ U.S. Patent No. 5,584,025 (“'025 patent”). On November 8, 2007, defendants submitted their invalidity contentions, totaling 1300 pages. Plaintiffs assert that the invalidity contentions do not comply with the Patent Local Rules because they do not specify how each item of prior art asserted renders the patent obvious or anticipates any of the asserted infringement claims. Defendants, meanwhile, contend that plaintiffs’ amended infringement contentions, which were served on February 5, 2008, contain impermissible substantive changes.

I. Plaintiffs’ motion to strike

A. Identification of whether the asserted…

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.