Capital Security Systems, Inc. v. NCR Corporation et al
| Capital Security Systems, Inc. |
| NCR Corporation, SunTrust Banks, Inc. and SunTrust Bank |
| SunTrust Banks, Inc., SunTrust Bank and NCR Corporation |
| Capital Security Systems, Inc. |
| 1:2014cv01516 |
| May 19, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
| Atlanta Office |
| Fulton |
| William S. Duffey |
| Patent |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1338 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
227
OPINION AND ORDER denying Plaintiff Capital Security Systems, Inc.'s Motion to Hear the Truth Under Making False Statements 223 . It is further ordered that any further filings submitted by Ms. Gustin in her pro se capacity may subject Plaintiff to sanctions for failing to comply with a Court order and any other appropriate response to Plaintiffs failure to retain counsel. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. on 6/12/18. (ddm)
|
|
Filing
206
OPINION AND ORDER denying Defendant NCR Corporation's Motion for Attorney's Fees 152 and Motion for Additional Attorney's Fees and Costs 198 and granting Defendant NCR Corporation's Motion for Leave to File Matters Under Seal 200 . Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 1/5/18. (ddm)
|
|
Filing
192
OPINION AND ORDER denying in part and granting in part Defendant NCR Corporation's Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity 162 . NCR's Motion is DENIED with respect to its obviousness arguments and GRANTED with respect to its indefiniteness arguments. It is further ordered that the parties' Motions for Leave to File Matters Under Seal [161,180] are granted. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 6/30/17. (ddm)
|
|
Filing
191
OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff Capital Security Systems, Inc.'s Motion to Strike 181 . Capsec's Motion is GRANTED, and the Court strikes (1) the LeClerc, Campbell, Chuang, Moore, Dhle, and Graef reference s in NCRs Supplemental Stanners Report, Stanners Reply Report, Stanners Declaration, and Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity; (2) the invalidity arguments based on obviousness combinations first disclosed in the Stanners Reply Report from that report, the Stanners Declaration, and the Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity; and (3) the portions of the Elwin Declaration, and the Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity sections relying upon it, in which Elwin states that certain documen ts were publicly available, published, or created on certain dates, that the AT&T 5675 ATM was on sale or in public use in the United States by certain dates, that certain documents and products reflect the functionality and operation of the 5675 ATM by certain dates, that certain products provide the interface through which applications communicate with the Document Processing Module, and that certain documents show sales or offers for sale. ([162.27] 5-7, 9-20, 24, 26). Capsec's Motion is DENIED with respect to (1) the remainder of the Elwin Declaration; and (2) Capsec'srequest for attorneys fees. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 5/31/17. (ddm)
|
|
Filing
100
OPINION and ORDER GRANTING 47 Motion to Stay Plaintiff's claims against SunTrustBanks Inc. and SunTrust Bank. The Stay does not apply to Plaintiff's claims against NCR. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 6/18/2015. (adg) Modified on 6/18/2015 (adg).
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Georgia Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
