Legal Opinion
CNET Networks, Inc. v. Etilize, Inc.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided March 4, 2008No. C 06-05378 MHPPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Claim Construction Memorandum and Order for United States Patent Nos. 6,714,933 and 7,082,426.
MARILYN HALL PATEL, District Judge.
Plaintiff CNET Networks, Inc. (“CNET”) brings this action against defendant Etilize, Inc. (“Etilize”) alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,714,-933 (“the '933 patent”) and 7,082,426 (“the '426 patent”). The '426 patent is a continuation-in-part of the '933 patent, which claims a method and system for aggregating content for an online purchasing system. Now before the court are the parties’ claim construction briefs, filed pursuant to Patent…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Edward H. Phillips v. Awh Corporation, Hopeman Brothers, Inc., and Lofton Corporation, Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Vitronics Corporation v. Conceptronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Teleflex, Inc. v. Ficosa North America Corp., Fico Cables, S.A., and Ficosa North America S.A. De C.V.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- CBS Interactive, Inc. v. Etilize, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2009
- CNET Networks, Inc. v. Etilize, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2008