Legal Opinion
Autobytel, Inc. v. Dealix Corp.
District Court, E.D. Texas
Decided October 3, 2006No. 2:04-cv-00338PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
DAVIS, District Judge.
Before the Court is Autobytel’s Motion to Compel (Docket No. 183). After considering the parties’ written submissions and oral arguments, the motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
BACKGROUND
Autobytel brought suit for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,282,517 (“the '517 patent”) on September 24, 2004. Over a year after filing suit, Autobytel added a charge of willful infringement. On June 6, 2006, Dealix produced a non-infringement opinion (the “non-infringement opinion”) concerning the '517 patent prepared by Mr. Gard of Carr & Farrell…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Comark Communications, Inc. v. Harris CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- In Re Echostar Communications CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Fort James Corporation v. Solo Cup CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- In re LTV Securities LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1981
- Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Reedhycalog UK, Ltd. v. Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations Inc.District Court, E.D. Texas · 2008
- Ackerman McQueen Inc v. StinchfieldDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2020
- AdvoCare International, LLC v. SmithDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 2023
- Dynatemp International, Inc. v. RMS of Georgia, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2024
- Dynatemp International, Inc. v. RMS of Georgia, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2024
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.