Opinion
2:18-cv-00100-JRG-RSP
06-01-2021
ULTRAVISION TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Plaintiff, v. GOVISION LLC, Defendant.
ORDER
RODNEY GILSCRAP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Defendants Shenzhen Absen Optoelectronic Co., Ltd. and Absen, Inc. (collectively, “Absen”) previously filed a Motion for Summary Judgment that U.S. Patent Nos. 9, 642, 272; 9, 916, 782; 9, 978, 294; 9, 990, 869; and 10, 248, 372 Are Invalid for Improper Inventorship (“Invalidity Motion”) (Dkt. No. 331.) A Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 626), recommended denial of Absen's Invalidity Motion. Absen has now filed Objections (Dkt. No. 632), with Plaintiff Ultravision Technologies, LLC filing a Response (Dkt. No. 636.)
After conducting a de novo review of the briefing on the Invalidity Motion, the Report and Recommendation, and the briefing on Absen's Objections, the Court agrees with the reasoning provided within the Report and Recommendation and concludes that the Objections fail to show that the Report and Recommendation was erroneous. Consequently, the Court OVERRULES Absen's Objections and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and orders that the Invalidity Motion (Dkt. No. 331) is DENIED.
SO ORDERED