Court declines to reconsider summary judgment ruling for partial summary judgment ruling limiting damages
IMX, Inc. v. Lendingtree, LLC, No. 03-1067-SLR, Jan. 10, 2006.
Robinson, J. Motion for reconsideration denied regarding prior summary judgment ruling granting defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment limiting damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. Section 287(a).
The technology at issue involves unique loan information and real-time trading system.
The plaintiff contended on summary judgment that early conception or reduction to practice prevented the ‘699 patent from being considered as prior art. No contrary evidence was offered by defendant. The court found the evidence offered by plaintiff was sufficient and granted summary judgment on this issue. The motion for reconsideration was denied since there was no showing of error of law or fact or showing of manifest injustice.
The court limited damages on summary judgment on the grounds of 35 U.S.C. Section 287 (marking). On reconsideration, the court denied the motion, finding no error of law or fact or showing of manifest injustice.
The court clarified a prior footnote on anticipation, noting extrinsic evidence is permitted to explain the disclosed reference.
