TiVo v Moto: A Closer Look at the LTR Brief Decisions
Judge Gilstrap accomplished a lot in his decision on which of the 11 Letter Requests the parties can brief for summary judgment, not the least of which was keeping the trial schedule intact. The biggest help there was cutting the number of motions down to a manageable amount, for his benefit at least.
Denying the parties’ attempts to argue non-infringement & invalidity of opposing patent claims was the quickest and cleanest way to whittle the pile in half. It had the added benefit of sending a message to both party’s – worry about the enforceability of your own patents and we’ll let a jury decide about infringement. The one exception was Moto’s briefing non-infringement of the TiVo ‘195 patent, but maybe he kept that one in to stick it to Moto. That patent is a sideshow for TiVo.
For an in-depth look at each of the Letter Requests and an analysis of Gilstrap’s decision to allow/disallow further briefing, and other great discussion about everything TiVo… join the discussion at the Members-only TiVo Insights board brought to you by Investor Discussion Board, and follow this link for more information to join…it’s all free, no money and no trolls!