Broussard v. Go-Devil Mfg. Co. of La., Inc.

Full title: KYLE BROUSSARD, ET AL. v. GO-DEVIL MANUFACTURING CO. OF LA., INC. D/B/A…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

Date published: Jun 5, 2014

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:08-cv-00124-BAJ-RLB (M.D. La. Jun. 5, 2014)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:08-cv-00124-BAJ-RLB CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:08-cv-00125-BAJ-RLB

06-05-2014

KYLE BROUSSARD, ET AL. v. GO-DEVIL MANUFACTURING CO. OF LA., INC. D/B/A GO-DEVIL MANUFACTURERS OF LOUISIANA, INC. KYLE BROUSSARD, ET AL. v. MUD BUDDY, L.L.C. D/B/A MUD BUDDY MANUFACTURING

BRIAN A. JACKSON

CONSOLIDATED WITH¹

1 The Court consolidated civil actions 3:08-cv-00124-BAJ-RLB and 3:08-cv-00125-BAJ-RLB for the Markman hearing and for trial before the bench on the issue of patent validity, pursuant to Rule 42(a)(1). (See 08-cv-00124 Docs. 82, 90).

ORDER

Considering Defendant Go-Devil's LETTER TO THE COURT (08-cv-00124 Doc. 128), and in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's most recent decision in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., No. 13-369, 572 U.S. ___, 2014 WL 2440536 (June 2, 2014):

IT IS ORDERED that the Parties shall submit briefs on whether the patents-in-suit are void for lack of definiteness no later than Friday, June 13, 2014. The Parties' briefs shall be limited to no more than seven (7) pages, and shall otherwise be in accordance with this Court's Local Rules. See, e.g., M.D. La. LR 7.5, LR10.1. In addition to addressing whether the patents-in-suit are invalid for lack of definiteness in light of the Supreme Court's Nautilus decision, the Parties' briefs shall address whether Defendants waived the issue of invalidity for lack of definiteness "[b]y failing to properly raise that argument" in their post-trial briefs. Fresenius USA, Inc. v. Baxter Int'l, Inc., 582 F.3d 1288, 1295 (Fed. Cir. 2009).²

2 Defendant Go-Devil's post-trial brief addressed whether the patents-in-suit are invalid as obvious, and for lack of enablement and written description, (see 08-cv-00124 Doc. 124 at pp. 2-3); Defendant Mud Buddy limited its post-trial analysis to whether the patents-in-suit are invalid as obvious, (see 08-cv-00125 Doc. 140 at p. 2)).
--------

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall docket this Order in the case-specific dockets for civil action 08-cv-00124 and civil action 08-cv-00125.

Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 5^th day of June, 2014.

__________

BRIAN A. JACKSON, CHIEF JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA