Aristocrat Technologies v. International Game Technology

Good Law
714 F. Supp. 2d 991·2010 WL 1948684·2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47290
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 13, 2010C-06-03717 RMWCalifornia3,438 words

Opinion

Opinion

Whyte, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT BASED ON MUNIAUCTION

Defendants International Game Technology and IGT (collectively “IGT”) move for summary judgment of non-infringement under the Federal Circuit’s decision in Muniauction, Inc. v. Thomson Corp., 532 F.3d 1318 (Fed.Cir.2008). For the reasons set forth below, the court grants the motion.

I. BACKGROUND

Aristocrat Technologies, et al. (collectively “Aristocrat”), the patentee, and IGT are competitors in the market for electronic gaming machines. On June 12, 2006, Aristocrat filed suit alleging infringement of United States Patent No. 7,056,215 (“'215 Patent”). When United States Patent No. 7,108,603 (“'603 Patent”) issued, Aristocrat added this patent to the suit. The relevant factual background is set forth in this court’s May 14, 2009 claim construction order. Dkt. No. 498 at 2-3. Generally speaking, the patents describe an innovation in electronic gaming machines in which the use of a second bonus game allows greater flexibility in game type as well as increased operator control over jackpot payouts.

Claim 1 of the '215 Patent is reproduced below, with the main steps highlighted in…

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.