Holmberg v. Stealth Cam, LLC
| Larry Holmberg |
| Stealth Cam, LLC |
| 0:2011cv00248 |
| February 1, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| DMN Office |
| Polk |
| Leo I. Brisbois |
| Donovan W. Frank |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 145 |
| 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
337
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. 1. Plaintiff's Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment Entered to Remove any Judgment as a Matter of Law on Infringement of the 038 Patent (Doc. No. 259 ) is GRANTED. 2. Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment as a Mat ter of Law on Infringement of the 038 Patent (Doc. No. 261 ) is DENIED. 3. Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law on Infringement of the 196 Patent (Doc. No. 263 ) is DENIED. 4. Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment as a Matter of L aw on Validity of the 196 Patent (Doc. No. 266 is DENIED. 5. Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law on Validity of the 038 Patent (Doc. No. 268 is DENIED. 6. Plaintiff's Motion for Judgement as a Matter of Law on Damages (Do c. No. 270 ) is DENIED. 7. Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law on Willful Infringement (Doc. No. 280 ) is DENIED. 8. Defendant's Rule 50(b) Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law of No Damages (Doc. No. 276 ) is DE NIED. 9. Defendant's Rule 50(b) Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law of No Willful Infringement (Doc. No. 283 ) is DENIED. 10. Defendant's Motion for Attorney's Fees (Doc. No. 291 ) is DENIED. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 9/10/2015. (BJS)
|
|
Filing
199
ORDER. 1. Stealth Cam's request for leave to file a motion for reconsideration (Doc. No. 126 ) is DENIED. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 11/6/2014. (BJS)
|
|
Filing
121
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. 1. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 89 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. Stealth Cam's motion for summary judgment as to the claim limitation "capable of being mount ed to a weapon" is DENIED. b. Stealth Cam's motion for summary judgment as to the claim limitations "display" and "liquid crystal display" is GRANTED. c. Stealth Cams motion for summary judgment as to the claim limitatio n "mounting rail" is DENIED. d. Stealth Cam's motion for summary judgment as to the claim limitation "a mount for receiving a mounting rail" is DENIED. e. Stealth Cam's motion for summary judgment as to claim 8 of the 245 Patent is GRANTED. 2. Defendant's Motion to Exclude (Doc. No. 108 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: The motion is denied except that Holmberg is precluded from pursuing any theory of indirect or induced infringement. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 4/18/2014. (BJS)
|
|
Filing
87
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. The claims at issue are construed as set forth in this Memorandum Opinion and Order. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 7/15/2013. (BJS)
|
|
Filing
24
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. 1. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 12 ) is GRANTED. 2. Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. No. 1 ) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 3. This Order is Stayed for forty-five (45) days to allow Plaintiff to amend his Complaint. Should Plaintiff amend his Complaint within the prescribed time period, the stay will be lifted and the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 12 ) will be denied without prejudice to bring another motion to dismiss, if appropriate. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 8/3/2011. (BJS)
|
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 Minnesota 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.
