In Re Koninklijke Philips Patent Litigation
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 IN RE KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS PATENT Case No. 18-cv-01885-HSG
LITIGATION
8
ORDER DENYING ASUS’S REQUEST
9 FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN This Document Relates To: ADDITIONAL MOTION FOR 10 SUMMARY JUDGMENT
ALL ACTIONS
11 Re: Dkt. No. 971
12 13 14 Pending before the Court is Defendants ASUS Computer International and ASUSTeK 15 Computer Inc.’s (collectively, “ASUS”) request for leave to file an additional motion for summary 16 judgment. Dkt. No. 971 at 2. ASUS asserts that the Federal Circuit decision in Koninklijke 17 Philips N.V. v. Google LLC, 948 F.3d 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2020), demonstrates that claim 12 of U.S. 18 Patent No. 7,529,806 (the “’806 Patent”) is invalid. Specifically, ASUS argues that in affirming 19 the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) finding that claim 1 of the ’806 Patent is 20 invalid, the Federal Circuit adopted interpretations of claim 12 terms “media presentation” and 21 “identifying,” “determining,”…