Comcast Cable Communications, LLC v. Sprint Communications Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
DuBois, J.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION... 124
II. RENEWED MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW.. .-126
A. Standard of Review... 126
B. Comcast’s Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law That Claim 113 of the ’870 Patent is Not Obvious... 127
1. Applicable Law.. .127
2. Substantial Evidence that the Challenged Limitations Existed in the Prior Art.. .128
3. No Substantial Evidence of Motivation to Combine or Likelihood of Success ...135
4. Conclusion... 138
C. Comcast’s Alternative Motion for a New Trial on Obviousness... 139
D. Sprint’s Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of…
2Cases cited47 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2012
- Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1970
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In re Biogen 755 Patent Litig.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2018
- Finjan LLC v. ESET, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2021
- Regents of the University of Minnesota v. AT&T Mobility LLCDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2024