Eidos Display, LLC et al v. AU Optronics Corporation et al
Plaintiff: Eidos Display, LLC and Eidos III, LLC
Defendant: AU Optronics Corporation, AU Optronics Corporation America, Chi Mei Innolux Corporation, Chi Mei Optoelectronics USA, Inc., Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd., HannStar Display Corporation and Hannspree North America, Inc.
Case Number: 6:2011cv00201
Filed: April 25, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Office: Tyler Office
County: Anderson
Presiding Judge: Leonard Davis
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
March 5, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 901 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. Plaintiffs' Motion for Enhanced Damages 876 is GRANTED-AS-MODIFIED, such that the appropriate enhancement in this case is $4.1 million, in addition to the $4.1 million awarded by the jury. Plaintiffs 9; Motion for Attorney's Fees 883 is DENIED. Plaintiffs' Motion for Pre-Judgment and Post-Judgment Interest 884 is GRANTED. Accordingly, the appropriate rate for pre-judgment interest is the prime rate, compounded quarterly, and the app ropriate rate for post-judgment interest is the 1-year constant maturity Treasury yield rate. Plaintiffs' Motion for Clarification and Entry of Judgment 882 is GRANTED-AS-MODIFIED. Plaintiffs' claim for indirect infringement is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by District Judge Rodney Gilstrap on 03/05/18. (mll, )
December 8, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 895 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW (re Equitable Estoppel). The Court finds that the doctrine of equitable estoppel does not bar Plaintiffs' recovery of damages on any claim for infringement in this case and Innolux's defense of equitable estoppel is therefore DENIED and DISMISSED. Signed by District Judge Rodney Gilstrap on 12/8/2017. (rlf)
April 6, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 722 UNSEALED VERSION OF 713 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 682 Motion to Exclude the Opinion and Testimony of Plaintiffs' Expert Arthur Cobb. Signed by Magistrate Judge John D. Love on 3/29/2017. (rlf)
April 1, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 715 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Granting-in-Part and Denying-in-Part 679 SEALED MOTION to Preclude Jerzy Kanicki and Roger Stewart from Testifying on Rejected Limitations Regarding "Metal Film" and "Gate Wiring. Within 14 days of the issuance of this Order, Dr. Kanicki and Mr. Stewart shall amend their reports consistent with the findings herein. Signed by Magistrate Judge John D. Love on 4/1/2017. (rlf)
March 22, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 703 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. Defendants' Motion to Exclude the Opinions of Dr. Smith (Doc. No. 681) is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge John D. Love on 3/22/2017. (rlf)
November 14, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 611 MEMORANDUM AND OPINION and ORDER DENYING 601 MOTION for Joinder to Join Stairway Capital filed by Chi Mei Optoelectronics USA, Inc., Chi Mei Innolux Corporation. Signed by Magistrate Judge John D. Love on 11/10/2016. (gsg)
February 18, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 580 MEMORANDUM AND OPINION, and ORDER granting in part and denying in part re 520 Opposed MOTION Seeking Construction of "Gate Wiring", and 521 SEALED MOTION re Gate Wiring. Signed by Magistrate Judge John D. Love on 2/18/2016. (gsg)
September 23, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 505 MEMORANDUM, OPINION AND ORDER issued in accordance with the mandate issued by the Federal Circuit. Signed by Magistrate Judge John D. Love on 9/23/15. (mjc, )
January 22, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 419 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: granting 314 Motion for Summary Judgment of Indefiniteness; granting 418 Motion for Leave to File Reply Brief. Plaintiff's objections are overruled. The Court adopts the Order of the United States Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this Court and Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment of Indefiniteness is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Leonard Davis on 01/22/14. (mll, )
April 12, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 184 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. The Court adopts the constructions set forth in this order. Signed by Magistrate Judge John D. Love on 04/12/13. (mll, )
Access additional case information on PACER

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 Texas Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Eidos Display, LLC et al v. AU Optronics Corporation et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Eidos Display, LLC
Represented By: Jennifer Parker Ainsworth
Represented By: Gaspare J Bono
Represented By: R Tyler Goodwyn, IV
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Eidos III, LLC
Represented By: Jennifer Parker Ainsworth
Represented By: Gaspare J Bono
Represented By: R Tyler Goodwyn, IV
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: AU Optronics Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: AU Optronics Corporation America
Represented By: Brian Alden Dietzel
Represented By: Marvin Craig Tyler
Represented By: James C Yoon
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Chi Mei Innolux Corporation
Represented By: Gregory M Luck
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Chi Mei Optoelectronics USA, Inc.
Represented By: Gregory M Luck
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Chunghwa Picture Tubes, Ltd.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: HannStar Display Corporation
Represented By: John R Alison
Represented By: Debra Elaine Gunter
Represented By: Ming-Tao Yang
Represented By: Herbert A Yarbrough, III
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Hannspree North America, Inc.
Represented By: John R Alison
Represented By: Debra Elaine Gunter
Represented By: Ming-Tao Yang
Represented By: Herbert A Yarbrough, III
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?