Advanced Display Technologies of Texas v. AU Optronics, 6:11cv011 (7/5/12)
Judge: Leonard Davis
Holding: Motion for Summary Judgment of Invalidity GRANTED
This is how you know that Fast Times At Ridgemont High's Jeff Spicoli could not have been a patent lawyer - because this ruling would have broken his heart.
Last Friday Judge Davis granted defendant's motion for summary judgment of indefiniteness in this case following claim construction proceedings, holding that the patent didn't provide a way to distinguish between a modulated surface and a highly modulated surface because it provided no objective means "to determine whether a bump was 'smooth'". I can't help but picture Spicoli trying to reason his way through this logical conundrum. But, importantly, he would not be "one skilled in the art" given the subject matter of this case. (I'm not sure if that's in the opinion or not, but seems like a safe bet to me).
Coincidentally, Judge Davis granted summary judgment of invalidity in 6:10cv011 six days ago. Weird, huh? Makes you wonder who has 6:12cv011. (Makes you wonder why I notice things like that, more like).
