Readers wanting their latest Geotag fix have been focusing on proceedings in Delaware since the cases pending in Marshall evaporated earlier this spring. And they got a big one recently, when the Delaware court granted declaratory judgment plaintiff Google's motion for summary judgment of noninfringement, and denied its motions for summary judgment on the basis of laches and invalidity
The court determined that Google had not shown an absence of disputed material facts that there was constructive notice of the infringement six years before the filing of the present lawsuit. Since the motion relied on the six-year presumption of laches, the motion was denied on this point.
Again, the court found genuine disputes of material fact as to the claims that the claims were anticipated or obvious.
For participants in the Texas cases, the arguments here might sound a little familiar – Google asserted that its accused product didn't meet three limitations of claim 1. Judge Andrews concluded that schuurely it didn't meet the "dynamic replication" requirement of the patented claims, and therefore did not address the other two arguments. Summary judgment of noninfringement GRANTED.