Here is an email I received from defs' attorney. After I read the brief and fill any trades I want to make I'll post my comments. I did pick some up today, as did others.
GRC
E-Data's reply is now posted
Date:
Wed, 02 Sep 1998 10:49:49 -0600
From:
Carl Oppedahl <carl@oppedahl.com>
To:
(Recipient list suppressed)
Graham & James, counsel for E-Data, has kindly provided in machine-readable
form its Plaintiff's Reply Memorandum in Further Support of its Motion for
Reconsideration of the Court's May 15, 1998 Order Interpreting the Claims
of the Patent-In-Suit. The brief is online at
patents.com .
What will happen next? The Motion for Reconsideration is now fully briefed
and the parties in the New York action await a decision by the Court on the
Motion. Of course, the decision will also be of interest to the defendants
in the Connecticut action, and to the tens of thousands of companies which
were told by the plaintiff that they were next after this case is over, and
that were encouraged by the plaintiff to take licenses under the patent.
If the Motion is granted, it seems likely there would be further Markman
proceedings directed to interpretation of the scope of the claims. If the
Motion is denied, it seems likely that most if not all of the defendants
would move for summary judgment of noninfringement. If such motions were
granted, it seems likely that the plaintiff would appeal. Such an appeal
would go to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Carl Oppedahl
Oppedahl & Larson
patents.com
|
