Free Statement - District Court of Delaware - Delaware


File Size: 11.4 kB
Pages: 3
Date: December 31, 1969
File Format: PDF
State: Delaware
Category: District Court of Delaware
Author: unknown
Word Count: 542 Words, 3,256 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/8725/499.pdf

Download Statement - District Court of Delaware ( 11.4 kB)


Preview Statement - District Court of Delaware
Case 1:04-cv-01373-KAJ

Document 499

Filed 12/11/2006

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

AMPEX CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY, ALTEK CORPORATION, and CHINON INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendants.

C.A. No. 04-1373 (KAJ)

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO RULE 10(b)(1)(B), F. R. APP. P., AND STATEMENT OF ISSUES PURSUANT TO RULE 10(b)(3)(A), F. R. APP. P. Pursuant to Rule 10(b)(1)(B), F. R. App. P., Ampex Corporation ("Ampex"), Plaintiff in the above named case, certifies that it is not ordering transcripts, all pertinent transcripts having already been prepared and filed in this action. Pursuant to Rule 10(b)(3)(A), F. R. App. P., Ampex states that it intends to present the following issues on appeal: (i) The correct construction of the terms "video data," "video pixel data," "data set," "image data set," "the video data," "the video pixel data"; "said video pixel data"; "the data sets"; "said image data sets," "external source," "image" and "the image;" and consequently whether the portion of the claim construction Order (D.I. 473) entered October 26, 2006, construing the aforesaid terms, and the portions of the Memorandum Opinion (D.I. 472) entered October 26, 2006, directed to the construction of the aforesaid terms, should be vacated to the extent inconsistent with said construction;

Case 1:04-cv-01373-KAJ

Document 499

Filed 12/11/2006

Page 2 of 3

(ii) Whether the October 31, 2006 Order (D.I. 480) granting Defendants' motion for summary judgment of non-infringement, on the ground of no literal infringement, should be reversed; and (iii) Whether the October 31, 2006 Order (D.I. 480) granting Defendants' motion for summary judgment of non-infringement, on the ground of no infringement under the doctrine of equivalents, should be reversed. MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELL LLP

OF COUNSEL: Jesse J. Jenner Sasha G. Rao Ropes & Gray LLP 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 (212) 596-9000 Norman H. Beamer Gabrielle E. Higgins Ropes & Gray LLP 525 University Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 (650) 617-4000 James E. Hopenfeld Ropes & Gray LLP One Metro Center 700 12th Street, NW Washington, DC 20005 December 11, 2006
548802

/s/ Julia Heaney Jack B. Blumenfeld (#1014) Julia Heaney (#3052) 1201 North Market Street P.O. Box 1347 Wilmington, DE 19899 (302) 658-9200 [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiff Ampex Corporation

-2-

Case 1:04-cv-01373-KAJ

Document 499

Filed 12/11/2006

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Julia Heaney, hereby certify that on December 11, 2006, I caused to be electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF, which will send notification of such filing(s) to the following: Collins J. Seitz, Jr., Esquire Connolly, Bove, Lodge & Hutz LLP and that I caused copies to be served upon the following in the manner indicated: BY HAND Collins J. Seitz Jr. Connolly Bove Lodge & Hutz LLP 1007 North Orange Street P.O. Box 2207 Wilmington, DE 19899 BY EMAIL S. Calvin Walden Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 399 Park Avenue New York, NY 10022 Michael J. Summersgill Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 60 State Street Boston, MA 02109

/s/ Julia Heaney Julia Heaney (#3052)