IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
MICRUNITY SYSTEMS §
ENGINEERING, INC. §
§ Plaintiff, §
CASE NO. 2:10cv091
§
CONSOLIDATED
vs. §
PATENT CASE
§ ACER INC., ET AL. §
§ Defendants. §
ORDER
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed by the Magistrate Judge on August 29, 2012 (Dkt. No. 490) recommending that the Court grant Plaintiff MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc.’s motions to strike and dismiss LG’s and Samsung’s inequitable conduct pleadings (Dkt. Nos. 355 and 356). LG and Samsung filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. See Dkt. No. 503.
The Court has reviewed Defendants’ objections. The Court is not persuaded that the facts alleged with respect to the HP Prior Art, whether viewed separately or in their totality, are sufficient to support a reasonable inference that MicroUnity withheld the HP Prior Art with the specific intent to deceive the Patent and Trademark Office. Therefore, Defendants objections are OVERRULED. For the reasons stated in the Report, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation.
2IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motions to Strike and Dismiss LG’s and Samsung’s Inequitable Conduct Pleadings (Dkt. Nos. 355 and 356) are GRANTED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 27th day of September, 2012.
