Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Summary Judgment against Calypso Wireless
iHub ^ | 1/30/13

Posted on 01/30/2013 9:47:37 AM PST by pabianice

In the five year case against T-Mobile, on January 16 the judge suddenly declared a summary judgment of non-infringement against Calypso Wireless, declaring that 'the evidence is so confusing that no reasonable juror could find for Calypso.'

I'm sorry, but I thought that the purpose of a jury trial WAS to make just such a determination in a disputed case.

Calypso holds the "923" patent governing all seamless switching among cell phones, Hot Spots, and WiFi. TM, in 2006, signed an agreement with Calypso to see the technology demonstrated but not to market it themselves. Subsequently, the evidence shows that TM broke the contract and has been using the patent for themselves. This is too difficult for a jury to see?

It is sad to see such apparent abuse by the courts.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Chit/Chat; Conspiracy
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 01/30/2013 9:47:44 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: pabianice

They got to the judge!!!!!!!!!!!


2 posted on 01/30/2013 10:04:56 AM PST by cpdiii (Deckhand, Roughneck, Mud Man, Geologist, Pilot, Pharmacist. THE CONSTITUTION IS WORTH DYING FOR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Summary judgment is only appropriate where there is “no genuine issue of material fact and” the moving party “is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

If as reported, this is a complete travesty of law. Maybe impeachment fodder (I wish).


3 posted on 01/30/2013 10:14:23 AM PST by jagusafr (the American Trinity (Liberty, In G0D We Trust, E Pluribus Unum))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

This would allow the case to go immediately to the appellate court, yes? If a jury found against TM, they would likely appeal anyway yes?

So is this just possibly a time-and-money-saver decision?

Note, given the court time, it’s also a saver of taxpayer money.


4 posted on 01/30/2013 10:38:50 AM PST by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fruser1
Today is the deadline for Calypso to file an appeal on the summary judgment.

Separately, the Markman ruling -- which was badly tilted toward whatever TM wanted -- has been appealed to the US District Court. If that ruling is overturned, it's a whole new ball game and, one hopes, a different magistrate judge. But the scheduled trial date of March 4 is probably gone.

5 posted on 01/30/2013 11:00:40 AM PST by pabianice (washington, dc ..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson