Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 82 views

    Vringo V Google - Minutes Day 7 (2012!10!24)

    Uploaded by

    Dan Ravicher
    This document summarizes the proceedings from a day in a patent infringement trial between I/P Engine, Inc. and several technology companies in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. It notes that the plaintiff rested their case after reading an interrogatory into the record. It also describes the court denying the defendants' motions to strike testimony from a Dr. Becker and for judgment as a matter of law. The day concluded with the defendants presenting evidence and witnesses before the jury was excused until the following day.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Vringo V Google - Minutes Day 7 (2012!10!24)

    Uploaded by

    Dan Ravicher
    82 views2 pages
    This document summarizes the proceedings from a day in a patent infringement trial between I/P Engine, Inc. and several technology companies in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. It notes that the plaintiff rested their case after reading an interrogatory into the record. It also describes the court denying the defendants' motions to strike testimony from a Dr. Becker and for judgment as a matter of law. The day concluded with the defendants presenting evidence and witnesses before the jury was excused until the following day.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Vringo v Google - Minutes Day 7 (2012!10!24)

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes the proceedings from a day in a patent infringement trial between I/P Engine, Inc. and several technology companies in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. It notes that the plaintiff rested their case after reading an interrogatory into the record. It also describes the court denying the defendants' motions to strike testimony from a Dr. Becker and for judgment as a matter of law. The day concluded with the defendants presenting evidence and witnesses before the jury was excused until the following day.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    82 views2 pages

    Vringo V Google - Minutes Day 7 (2012!10!24)

    Uploaded by

    Dan Ravicher
    This document summarizes the proceedings from a day in a patent infringement trial between I/P Engine, Inc. and several technology companies in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. It notes that the plaintiff rested their case after reading an interrogatory into the record. It also describes the court denying the defendants' motions to strike testimony from a Dr. Becker and for judgment as a matter of law. The day concluded with the defendants presenting evidence and witnesses before the jury was excused until the following day.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA NORFOLK/NEWPORT NEWS DIVISION Wednesday, October 24, 2012

    MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS IN

    Open Court

    PRESENT: THE HONORABLE RAYMOND A. JACKSON, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE


    Deputy Clerk: P. Thompson Reporter: Sharon Borden, OCR (am) Jody Stewart, OCR (pm)

    Set: 10:00 a.m.


    Case No.

    Started: 10:00 a.m.

    Ended: 5:05 p.m.

    2:11cv512 I/P Engine, Inc., Plaintiff/Counter Defendant v.

    AOL Inc., Google Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., Gannett Company, Inc., and Target Corporation, Defendants/Counter Claimants

    Attorneys Kenneth Brothers, Jeffrey Sherwood, Dawn Rudenko, Donald Schultz, and Frank Cimino, Jr. appeared on behalf of the Plaintiff. Andrew Perlman, Corporate Representative present. Attorneys David Nelson, Robert Wilson, Emily OBrien, David Perlson, David Bilsker, and Stephen Noona, appeared on behalf of defendants AOL, Inc., Google Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., Gannett Company, Inc., and Target Corporation.

    Matter came on for trial by jury (Day #7). Out of the presence of the jury, Defendants Motion to Strike Testimony of Dr. Becker Argued Court DENIES the Motion. Out of the presence of the jury, Defendants Motion to Strike Certain Testimony of Dr. Becker Argued Court to issue a curative jury instruction. Out of the presence of the jury, the Court heard objections to certain exhibits.

    (Lunch Recess: 1:15pm 2:30pm)

    (continued on page 2)

    Case No. 2:11cv512 I/P Engine v. AOL Inc.,et. al.

    Continuation...

    (page 2)

    Petit jurors (9) appeared pursuant to adjournment last evening 10/23/12. Plaintiff read interrogatory into the record. Plaintiff rested. Out of the presence of the jury, Defendants Motion for a Judgment as a Matter of Law Argued Court DENIED the motion.

    Defendants presented evidence witnesses sworn and testified. Plaintiffs Exhibit introduced and admitted into evidence. Objections heard and rulings made on the record.

    Jurors excused and Court adjourned until Thursday, 10/25/12 at 10:00 a.m.

    You might also like