Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

Navico, Inc. et al v. Garmin International, Inc. et al, No. 2:16-cv-00190 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 29, 2017)

Adopted in Part Report and recommendation adopted with modification
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:16-cv-00190, Dkt. No. 208
Decided
August 29, 2017
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J. — Marshall
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 176 Report and Recommendation
Length
2 pages

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

NAVICO INC. and NAVICO § HOLDING AS, §

§ Plaintiffs, § § v. § NO. 2:16-CV-00190-JRG-RSP § GARMIN INTERNATIONAL, INC. and § GARMIN USA, INC., §

§ Defendants. §

ORDER

The above entitled and numbered civil action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 176) by Magistrate Judge Payne, which recommends that Navico’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment That the “Kongsberg” Documents and “MS1000 System” Do Not Qualify as Prior Art (Dkt. No. 102) be granted in part. Garmin objected to the Report, (Dkt. No. 194), and Navico responded, (Dkt. No. 206).

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, Garmin’s objections, and Navico’s response, IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Payne’s Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 176) is hereby ADOPTED and Garmin’s objections are OVERRULED. Navico’s Motion (Dkt. No. 102) is therefore GRANTED IN PART:

(1) Navico’s Motion is GRANTED as to the MS 1000 Operator Manual and the

Standing Timber Application Note. Navico’s Motion is also GRANTED as to2 Garmin’s allegations of prior use and prior sale based on the 2002 sale to Odyssey Marine.

(2) As to the Babine Lake Application Note, Navico’s Motion is DENIED.

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

Navico, Inc. et al v. Garmin International, Inc. et al, No. 2:16-cv-00190 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 29, 2017).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-2_16-cv-00190-5
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-2_16-cv-00190-5

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.