Duhn Oil Tool, Inc. v. Cooper Cameron Corp.

Good Law
474 F. Supp. 2d 1148·2007 WL 331638·2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11284
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 1, 20071:05-CV-01411 OWW LJOCalifornia8,063 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wanger, J.

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE CLAIM INTERPRETATION

1. INTRODUCTION

Before the court are the parties’ motions for a Markman claim interpretation of United States Patent No. 6,920,925 (the “'925 Patent” or the “Patent”). (Doc. 40, Duhn Oil’s Claim Construction Brief, Filed August 21, 2006 (“Pl.Brief”); Doc. 43, Defendant’s Opening Markman Brief, Filed August, 21, 2006 (“Def.Brief”).) Oral argument was heard on October 11, 2006.

2. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff Duhn Oil Tool, Inc. (“Duhn Oil” or “Plaintiff’) filed its complaint for patent infringement against Defendant Cooper Cameron Corporation (“Cameron” or “Defendant”) on November 11, 2005. (Doc. 1, Complaint.) Cameron answered and filed a counterclaim for declaratory relief of patent invalidity against Duhn Oil on May 17, 2006. (Doc. 15, Defl’s Answer and Counterclaim.) On April 12, 2006 Duhn Oil filed and answer to Cameron’s counterclaim. (Doc. 18, Pl.’s Answer to Counterclaim.)

Cameron filed a motion for summary judgment on July 15, 2006. (Doc. 26, Motion for Summary Judgment.) On August 4, 2006 Duhn Oil opposed the motion. (Doc. 31, Opposition.) On August 14, 2006, Cameron filed a reply to the opposition. (Doc. 33,…

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.