GPNE Corp. v. Apple Inc.

Good Law
108 F. Supp. 3d 839·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75356
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 9, 2015Case No.:12-CV-02885-LHKCalifornia17,363 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Koh, J.

ORDER DENYING GPNE’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW, OR FOR A NEW TRIAL; DENYING APPLE’S MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW

On October 22, 2014, after seven days of trial and four and a half hours of deliberation, a jury concluded that Defendant Apple, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Apple”) did not infringe two patents owned by Plaintiff GPNE Corp. (“Plaintiff’ or “GPNE”), and that GPNE’s patents were not invalid. See ECF No. 559 (Jury Verdict).

Before the Court are the parties’ post-trial motions. Specifically, GPNE seeks judgment as a matter of law on infringement, or in the alternative, a new trial. ECF No. 572 (GPNE JMOL Br.). Apple seeks judgment as a matter of law on its indefiniteness defense. ECF No. 574 (Apple Indefiniteness JMOL). 1 For the following reasons, the Court DENIES each of the parties’ requests.

1. BACKGROUND

A. Asserted Patents

GPNE alleges that Apple infringes U.S. Patent Nos. 7,570,954 (the “ ’954 Patent”), and 7,792,492 (the “ ’492 Patent”) (collectively, “Asserted Patents”). 2 The Asserted *843 Patents share the same specification, which provides that the “invention pertains to communications paging, and particularly to two-way paging method 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.